Degenerate Perturbation Theory Question

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on applying perturbation theory to a two-dimensional infinitely deep square well, specifically analyzing the potential V(x) = α(x² + y²). The first-order correction to the energy for the first excited states (quantum numbers (1,2) and (2,1)) was calculated using Maple, yielding a result of αa²(16π² - 15)/(24π²) for the state (1,2) and zero for the transition between states (1,2) and (2,1). The conclusion reached is that the perturbation does not lift the degeneracy between these states, as both yield the same first-order energy correction.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of perturbation theory in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with the two-dimensional infinitely deep square well model
  • Proficiency in using Maple for mathematical computations
  • Knowledge of quantum state notation and inner product calculations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of perturbation theory on degeneracy lifting in quantum systems
  • Learn about the mathematical formulation of the two-dimensional infinite square well
  • Explore advanced Maple techniques for solving quantum mechanical problems
  • Investigate other forms of perturbations and their effects on energy levels
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in quantum mechanics, particularly those focusing on perturbation theory and its applications in quantum systems. This discussion is beneficial for anyone looking to deepen their understanding of energy corrections in quantum wells.

T-7
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
Hello,

This is a question on perturbation theory - which I am trying to apply to the following example.

Homework Statement



The two-dimensional infinitely deep square well (with sides at x=0,a; y=0,a) is perturbed by the potential V(x)=\alpha(x^{2}+y^{2}). What is the first-order correction to the energy of the first excited states (that is, those with quantum numbers (1,2), (2,1))?

The Attempt at a Solution



I have calculated \langle\left\right 1,2^{(0)}|\widehat{V}|2,1^{(0)} \rangle. In Maple this is:

> value( Doubleint( (2/a)*sin(Pi*x/a)*sin(2*Pi*y/a)*(x^2+y^2)*(2/a)*sin(2*Pi*x/a)*sin(Pi*y/a) ,x=0...a,y=0...a) );

which is zero.

I have calculated

\langle\left\right 1,2^{(0)}|\widehat{V}|1,2^{(0)} \rangle. In Maple this is:

value( alpha*Doubleint(4*sin(Pi*x/a)*sin(2*Pi*y/a)*(x^2+y^2)*sin(Pi*x/a)*sin(2*Pi*y/a),x=0..a,y=0..a) )

which is

\alpha a^{2}\left( \frac{16\pi^{2}-15}{24 \pi^{2}} \right)

Am I to conclude from this that the perturbation, in *this* case, does not lift the degeneracy, and that the first order correction to the energy is the same for both states, and is given above?

I had expected to form a matrix, work out its eigenvalues and eigenvectors, use that to construct a new basis etc. But the matrix I would form from the above would already be diagonalised, with a repeated eigenvalue of 1.

I'd appreciate some speedy words of wisdom :-)

Thanks folks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't see how your <12|V|21> integral could be zero.
 
pam said:
I don't see how your <12|V|21> integral could be zero.

Why not?

The integral of sin(x) sin(2x) x^2 is zero since it's odd with respect to the center of the well and the integral sin(x) sin(2x) y^2 is obviously zero.

EDIT: Oops, I was wrong on this since I was thinking about a well going from -a/2 to a/2,
 
Last edited:
T-7 said:
Hello,

This is a question on perturbation theory - which I am trying to apply to the following example.

Homework Statement



The two-dimensional infinitely deep square well (with sides at x=0,a; y=0,a) is perturbed by the potential V(x)=\alpha(x^{2}+y^{2}). What is the first-order correction to the energy of the first excited states (that is, those with quantum numbers (1,2), (2,1))?

The Attempt at a Solution



I have calculated \langle\left\right 1,2^{(0)}|\widehat{V}|2,1^{(0)} \rangle. In Maple this is:

> value( Doubleint( (2/a)*sin(Pi*x/a)*sin(2*Pi*y/a)*(x^2+y^2)*(2/a)*sin(2*Pi*x/a)*sin(Pi*y/a) ,x=0...a,y=0...a) );

which is zero.

I have calculated

\langle\left\right 1,2^{(0)}|\widehat{V}|1,2^{(0)} \rangle. In Maple this is:

value( alpha*Doubleint(4*sin(Pi*x/a)*sin(2*Pi*y/a)*(x^2+y^2)*sin(Pi*x/a)*sin(2*Pi*y/a),x=0..a,y=0..a) )

which is

\alpha a^{2}\left( \frac{16\pi^{2}-15}{24 \pi^{2}} \right)

Am I to conclude from this that the perturbation, in *this* case, does not lift the degeneracy, and that the first order correction to the energy is the same for both states, and is given above?

I had expected to form a matrix, work out its eigenvalues and eigenvectors, use that to construct a new basis etc. But the matrix I would form from the above would already be diagonalised, with a repeated eigenvalue of 1.

I'd appreciate some speedy words of wisdom :-)

Thanks folks

It does seem to me that you are right. Here the degeneracy is not lifted.
 
Did you leave out the x^2+y^2 in the integrals from 0 to a?
If you are integrating from -a/2 to +a/2, then change your question.
 
pam said:
Did you leave out the x^2+y^2 in the integrals from 0 to a?
If you are integrating from -a/2 to +a/2, then change your question.

Hi,

I have done the integral on paper and on Maple. On Maple I put:

> value( Doubleint( (2/a)*sin(Pi*x/a)*sin(2*Pi*y/a)*(x^2+y^2)*(2/a)*sin(2*Pi*x/a)*sin(Pi*y/a) ,x=0...a,y=0...a) );

The (x^2+y^2) is there, as you can see. The result is zero (which is what I also get using paper and pen).

Since the well is defined from 0 to a, I have used those as the limits of the integrals.
 
pam said:
I don't see how your <12|V|21> integral could be zero.

|1> and |2> are orthogonal. So,

<1,2|x^2 + y^2 |2,1>

=<1|x^2|2><2|1> + <1|2><2|y^2|1>

= 0 + 0

= 0

OP: It's quite reasonable that the potential doesn't lift the degeneracy since the unperturbed potential (the length of the box) is the same in x and y and the perturbation also treats x and y on equal footing.
 
olgranpappy said:
|1> and |2> are orthogonal. So,

<1,2|x^2 + y^2 |2,1>

=<1|x^2|2><2|1> + <1|2><2|y^2|1>

= 0 + 0

= 0

OP: It's quite reasonable that the potential doesn't lift the degeneracy since the unperturbed potential (the length of the box) is the same in x and y and the perturbation also treats x and y on equal footing.
That's right! Sorry to have said the opposite. I didn't notice the x^2 did not enter the y integral.
 
pam said:
That's right! Sorry to have said the opposite. I didn't notice the x^2 did not enter the y integral.

Ah yes..Ok, my mistake too. Of course, the x integral does not give zero but the y part will give zero so the whole thing is zero. My mistake too...
 
  • #10
Thanks for your thoughts folks. Much appreciated. :-)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K