Degeneracy of the 3d harmonic oscillator

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The degeneracy of the 3D harmonic oscillator is defined by the formula g(n) = (1/2)(n+1)(n+2), where n is the sum of the three quantum numbers n_x, n_y, and n_z. For n=0, there is no degeneracy; for n=1, the degeneracy is 3; and for n=2, it is 6. The discussion clarified the correct approach to calculating degeneracy and addressed common misconceptions about the formula's derivation. The formula was validated through specific examples, including calculations for n=10, confirming its accuracy.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics concepts, specifically harmonic oscillators
  • Familiarity with quantum numbers and their significance in energy levels
  • Knowledge of mathematical summation techniques
  • Basic grasp of operator notation in quantum mechanics, such as a and a†
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the degeneracy formula for the 3D harmonic oscillator in detail
  • Explore the concept of accidental degeneracy in quantum systems
  • Learn about the infinite cubic well and its implications for quantum states
  • Investigate the role of quantum numbers in other quantum mechanical systems
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to the 3D harmonic oscillator and its degeneracy.

mavyn
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi!

I'm trying to calculate the degeneracy of each state for 3D harmonic oscillator.
The eigenvalues are

En = (N + 3/2) hw

Unfortunately I didn't find this topic in my textbook.
Can somebody help me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What does the "N" operator look like? Is it just a^\dagger a or something else?
 
StatMechGuy said:
What does the "N" operator look like? Is it just a^\dagger a or something else?

Hi,
sorry I made a mistake in the formula. It should be

En = (n + 3/2) hw
 
n is the sum of 3 quantum numbers, n_x, n_y, n_z; for the lowest rung, which is n=0, there's no degeneracy. For n=1, there's 3 fold degeneracy (one of the quantum numbers is 1, and rest is 0). For n=2, there's 6 fold degenertacy (one of them may be 2 and rest 0, or two of them may be 1) and so on. The result is, for nth energy level, there's 3n degeneracy.
 
gulsen said:
n is the sum of 3 quantum numbers, n_x, n_y, n_z; for the lowest rung, which is n=0, there's no degeneracy. For n=1, there's 3 fold degeneracy (one of the quantum numbers is 1, and rest is 0). For n=2, there's 6 fold degenertacy (one of them may be 2 and rest 0, or two of them may be 1) and so on. The result is, for nth energy level, there's 3n degeneracy.

Thanks for the answer!
 
Watch out!

No that's not right.
You can't work it out for the first couple of cases and then presume the trend continues like that.
In fact, the degeneracy g(n) is:
g(n) = (1/2)(n+1)(n+2)
 
014137 said:
No that's not right.
You can't work it out for the first couple of cases and then presume the trend continues like that.
In fact, the degeneracy g(n) is:
g(n) = (1/2)(n+1)(n+2)

And even this, I think, is nt completely right. There are some levels with additional accidental degeneracy which don't fit the pattern.
 
Really? Which ones?
The formula can be derived like this:
n = n1 + n2 + n3
where 1,2,3 are three orthogonal directions.
Choose n1 then
n2 + n3 = n - n1
Can always pick n - n1 + 1 different pairs of n2, n3.
Sum over n1 from 0 to n:

Sum(n - n1 +1) = Sum(n - 1) - Sum(n1)
=(n - 1)*(n - 1) - (1/2)n(n + 1)
=(1/2)(n+1)(n+2)

Maybe there's a mistake somewhere?
 
014137 said:
Really? Which ones?
The formula can be derived like this:
n = n1 + n2 + n3
where 1,2,3 are three orthogonal directions.
Choose n1 then
n2 + n3 = n - n1
Can always pick n - n1 + 1 different pairs of n2, n3.
Sum over n1 from 0 to n:

Sum(n - n1 +1) = Sum(n - 1) - Sum(n1)
=(n - 1)*(n - 1) - (1/2)n(n + 1)
=(1/2)(n+1)(n+2)

Maybe there's a mistake somewhere?
I was thinking about the cubic infinite square well which is more tricky since it involves the sum of squares, so never mind my comment about accidental degeneracy.

Your formula may be right but I don't understand how you got from (n - 1)*(n - 1) - (1/2)n(n + 1) to (1/2)(n+1)(n+2). Those two expressions are not equal. Moreover, the sum \sum_{n_1 = 0}^n gives (n+1), not (n-1), right?

EDIT: Actually, the formula does not seem to work. I may have missed some states, but I can't get it to work for n=10, say.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
sorry - i was being silly
Sum(n - n1 +1) = Sum(n + 1) - Sum(n1)
=(n + 1)*(n + 1) - (1/2)n(n + 1)
=(1/2)(n+1)(n+2)
 
  • #11
Does work for n = 10, look:
State
3 x 10, 0, 0
3 x 8, 1, 1
3 x 6, 2, 2
3 x 4, 3, 3
3 x 2, 4, 4
3 x 0, 5, 5
6 x 9, 1, 0
6 x 8, 2, 0
6 x 7, 3, 0
6 x 7, 2, 1
6 x 6, 4, 0
6 x 6, 3, 1
6 x 5, 4, 1
6 x 5, 3, 2
Degeneracy = 6 x 8 + 3 x 6 = 6 x 11 = 66

The formula for g(n) gives (1/2)*(11)*(12) = 66

So it works.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
014137 said:
Does work for n = 10, look:
State
3 x 10, 0, 0
3 x 8, 1, 1
3 x 6, 2, 2
3 x 4, 3, 3
3 x 2, 4, 4
3 x 0, 5, 5
6 x 9, 1, 0
6 x 8, 2, 0
6 x 7, 3, 0
6 x 7, 2, 1
6 x 6, 4, 0
6 x 6, 3, 1
6 x 5, 4, 1
6 x 5, 3, 2
Degeneracy = 6 x 8 + 3 x 6 = 6 x 11 = 66

The formula for g(n) gives (1/2)*(11)*(12) = 66

So it works.


Yes, you are completely right. I had missed one entry.
Good job. Thanks for the correction.

If you know a formula for the infinite cubic well, let me know...It's in that case that accidental degeneracy are a killer.

Regards

Patrick
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Frank Schroer
  • #13
Thank you everyone.. i too was stuck in it and it helped me a lot
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K