Deriving Schrodinger Eq. from Complex Plane Wave: Erwin's Way

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter snoopies622
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the Schrödinger equation from a complex plane wave representation. Participants explore the validity of this approach, the implications of potential energy in the derivation, and the historical context of Schrödinger's work.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a method to derive the Schrödinger equation using a complex plane wave and discusses the implications of quantum substitutions for wave vector and energy.
  • Another participant challenges the validity of this derivation, arguing that the potential V affects the solution and that energy eigenvalues should not depend on position x.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that the total energy in a conservative field remains constant, implying that the derivative of the total energy with respect to position should equal zero.
  • One participant expresses curiosity about the legitimacy of deriving the Schrödinger equation from a plane wave, questioning whether it was an educated guess that proved successful.
  • Another participant notes that Schrödinger's own derivation was also an educated guess, referencing historical context.
  • A later reply includes an apology for the thread title, indicating it was initially a placeholder and not representative of the discussion's focus.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of deriving the Schrödinger equation from a complex plane wave, with some supporting the approach and others challenging it. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of potential energy and the nature of the solutions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the derivation related to the dependence of energy on potential, as well as the historical context of Schrödinger's work, which may not align with the proposed derivation method.

snoopies622
Messages
852
Reaction score
29
I see how one can arrive at the Schrödinger equation by starting with a complex plane wave

[tex] <br /> \psi = \psi _0 e ^{i(k \cdot x - \omega t)}<br /> [/tex]

taking its first partial derivative with respect to time, second partial derivative with respect to space, making the quantum substitutions

[tex] k=p/ \hbar \hspace{10 mm} \omega = E / \hbar [/tex]

as well as the classical one

[tex] <br /> E=p^2/2m + V(x,y,z)<br /> [/tex]

and putting it all together.

But why does this work when the [itex]\psi[/itex]'s that one finds in quantum mechanics are typically not plane waves? Luck? I've read that one should accept the Schrödinger equation as an axiom and not worry about "deriving" it, and yet...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Just plug it back in, and you will see your solution is not valid because of the potential V.

Namely, the first partial derivative with respect to x is:

[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial x} e^{i (kx - (\frac{p^2}{2m}+V(x)))} = (ik - iV'(x))e^{i (kx - (\frac{p^2}{2m}+V(x)))}[/tex]

The second one will be even more complicated. So your solution doesn't satisfy the schroedinger equation at all!

A second reason why you can see this: you're trying to find the energy eigenfunctions. The energy eigenvalues that you find are not allowed to depend on x. They should be constants. But in your case E clearly depends on [itex]V(x)[/itex].
 
Actually, since the total energy of a particle in a conservative field is assumed to be constant even if it moves around the field,

[tex] <br /> \frac {p^2}{2m} + V(x)<br /> [/tex]

is a constant and

[tex] <br /> \frac {\partial}{\partial x} ( \frac {p^2}{2m} + V(x) ) = 0.<br /> [/tex]
 
Does anyone else out there have any thoughts about this? It looks to me like one can in fact derive the Schrödinger equation by assuming that [itex]\psi[/itex] is a complex plane wave, even though the solutions to it are for the most part not plane waves. Does that make sense? Was the equation a kind of educated guess that happened to work with spectacular success?
 
Schrödinger didn't use this particular "derivation," but his own "derivation" was indeed an "educated guess." See this post for a summary of what Schrödinger actually did.
 
Thanks, jtbell; that looks very interesting. Maybe I can find the original paper translated into English at my local physics library.

Aside: To those for whom such things matter, I would like to apologize for the rather silly title I've given this thread. "The ways of Erwin" was the dummy title I was using while I tested the LaTeX. I was going to change it to something more specific like, "on the origin of the Schrödinger equation", but before I did I accidentally hit something or other on the computer I was using (not mine) and posted the question. I know one can edit a post, but if there's a way to change a thread title I never learned about it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
652
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K