Does \(\Psi_A(x,t)\) Indicate a Time-Dependent Probability and Average Energy?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the wave function \(\Psi_A(x,t)\) and its implications for predicting the probability of a particle's location within a box, as well as the nature of its average energy over time. Participants are exploring whether the wave function indicates time-dependent properties and how to interpret average energy in the context of quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the normalization of the wave function and its implications for predicting the particle's presence in the box. There are questions about the correct expression for average energy and whether it can be considered time-dependent. Some participants challenge the original poster's conclusions about the average energy and its dependence on time.

Discussion Status

Multiple interpretations of the average energy expression are being explored, with some participants providing clarifications on the necessity of weighting energies by their respective probabilities. There is an ongoing examination of the assumptions regarding the normalization of eigenstates and the implications for time dependence.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the wave function must be normalized and that the energies involved should be treated with respect to their probabilities. There is a mention of the complexity of the normalization constant \(K\) and its potential implications for the discussion.

UrbanXrisis
Messages
1,192
Reaction score
1
I am to find if the following wave function can predict the probability that a particle is somewhere (anywhere) in the box to be t-dependent. And whether it has time-dependent average energy.

[tex]\Psi_A (x,t) =K (-\Psi_6 (x,t) + \Psi_4 (x,t)- \Psi_2 (x,t))[/tex]

here's what I did to find if this finction predicts that the particle is somehere in the box:

[tex]\int \Psi_A (x,t) * \Psi_A (x,t) dx =K (-\Psi_6 (x,t) + \Psi_4 (x,t)- \Psi_2 (x,t)) K (-*\Psi_6 (x,t) + *\Psi_4 (x,t)- *\Psi_2 (x,t))=3k^2[/tex]

this means that this finction does predict that a particle is somehere in the box

if this function has time dependent average energy:
[tex]\frac{E_6 + E_4 + E_2}{3}[/tex]

right? my friend said that the energy can't be found, but isn't this the average energy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
UrbanXrisis said:
I am to find if the following wave function can predict the probability that a particle is somewhere (anywhere) in the box to be t-dependent. And whether it has time-dependent average energy.

[tex]\Psi_A (x,t) =K (-\Psi_6 (x,t) + \Psi_4 (x,t)- \Psi_2 (x,t))[/tex]

here's what I did to find if this finction predicts that the particle is somehere in the box:

[tex]\int \Psi_A (x,t) * \Psi_A (x,t) dx =K (-\Psi_6 (x,t) + \Psi_4 (x,t)- \Psi_2 (x,t)) K (-*\Psi_6 (x,t) + *\Psi_4 (x,t)- *\Psi_2 (x,t))=3k^2[/tex]

this means that this finction does predict that a particle is somehere in the box

if this function has time dependent average energy:
[tex]\frac{E_6 + E_4 + E_2}{3}[/tex]

right? my friend said that the energy can't be found, but isn't this the average energy?

This is not the average energy. Each energy in the numerator needs to be weighted to the relative probability of each state, ie.
[tex]\frac{E_6\int dx \Psi_6^*\Psi_6 + E_4\int dx \Psi_4^*\Psi_4 + E_2\int dx \Psi_2^*\Psi_2}{\int dx \Psi_A^*\Psi_A}[/tex]

-Dan
 
I think it's safe to say (altough the OP didn't mention it) that the [itex]\Psi_i[/itex] are normalized eigenstates of the Hamiltonian, so their absolute square integrates to 1.

So, that's the correct expression for the energy. If you are asked to prove that it is independent of time, it's trivial once you know that if [itex]\Psi_i[/itex] is normalized at some instant, it stays normalized. The relative difficulty is in showing that.

In general, the average of any time-independent observable that commutes with the Hamiltonian is always constant.
 
UrbanXrisis said:
I am to find if the following wave function can predict the probability that a particle is somewhere (anywhere) in the box to be t-dependent. And whether it has time-dependent average energy.

[tex]\Psi_A (x,t) =K (-\Psi_6 (x,t) + \Psi_4 (x,t)- \Psi_2 (x,t))[/tex]

here's what I did to find if this finction predicts that the particle is somehere in the box:
Others have given many useful hints but let me add a few details. First, the question is not about whether the wavefunction predicts that the particle is somewhere in the box! Of course it does (it would have to be identically zero to predict that the particle is nowhere in the box).

[tex]\int \Psi_A (x,t) * \Psi_A (x,t) dx =K (-\Psi_6 (x,t) + \Psi_4 (x,t)- \Psi_2 (x,t)) K (-*\Psi_6 (x,t) + *\Psi_4 (x,t)- *\Psi_2 (x,t))=3k^2[/tex]
Strictly speaking, K may be complex, so you should be getting 3 KK* =3 |K|^2 (assuming that Psi_1, Psi_2, etc are normalized and orthogonal..which they are if you mean the standard normalized energy eigenstates)


this means that this finction does predict that a particle is somehere in the box
Again, this just follows from the fact that the wavefunction is not zero!
if this function has time dependent average energy:
[tex]\frac{E_6 + E_4 + E_2}{3}[/tex]
This is the correct expression but how did you get it? (just curious).
But your conclusion is wrong! This result clearly does not depend on time (there is no time dependence!)
right? my friend said that the energy can't be found, but isn't this the average energy?
Of course the average energy can be found since the wavefunction is known. (however, asking "what is the energy of that state" is not a well defined question in quantum physics, as opposed to classical mechanics. Measuring the energy can produced either of the three energies with a probability of 33.3%...Maybe that's what you friend was referring to. But the *average energy* is clearly well-defined).

Patrick
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K