Double Slit Experiment Mathematics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical treatment of the double slit experiment, specifically focusing on the wave function of electrons passing through two slits and the application of Taylor series expansions to derive expressions related to the experiment. Participants explore the algebraic manipulations involved in the calculations and the use of Euler's identity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the wave function for electrons and attempts to manipulate the square root algebraically, expressing confusion over the simplification used in the text.
  • Another participant suggests that the simplification can be derived from the binomial theorem, which is a special case of the Taylor series.
  • A different participant applies the Taylor series around a specific point and finds discrepancies between their results and those presented in the book.
  • There is a mention of Euler's identity and its relevance, but participants express uncertainty about its application in this context.
  • One participant proposes using a substitution to simplify the calculations and suggests using the Taylor series about a different point.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the application of the Taylor series and the simplifications made in the book. There is no consensus on the correct approach or the validity of the algebraic manipulations presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their understanding of the fractional binomial theorem and its application to square roots, which may affect their calculations and interpretations.

James Brady
Messages
106
Reaction score
4
Electrons are shot thru two slits separated by a distance s at a screen a distance ##z_0## away. The wave function for the particles is proportional to ## e^{ik \sqrt{(x-s/2)^2+z_0^2}} +e^{ik \sqrt{(x+s/2)^2+z_0^2}}##

Taking the first one, we can manipulate the square root algebraically ##z_0\sqrt{1 + (x-s/2)^2/z_0^2}##, this is where I run into issues, according to the text we can use the fact that ##\sqrt{1+a} = 1 + a/2## in a power series expansion to get ##z_0 + (x-s/2)^2/2 z_0## for small values of x.

I don't know how they got that. When I do a Taylor series expansion on ##z_0\sqrt{1 + (x-s/2)^2/z_0^2}## I get ##z_0\sqrt{1 + (s/2)^2/z_0^2} - \frac{-s/2}{z_0*\sqrt{\frac{-2/2}{z_0^2}+1}} *x## ...

How did they come up with such a simple answer using ##\sum_{n=0}^1 \frac{f^n(0)}{n!} x^n## ?

Am I using the Taylor series wrong?

The book goes on to use ##2cos(\theta) = exp(i \theta) + exp(-i \theta)## to obtain a final wave equation (at the screen) of ##exp(i \theta) cos(ksx/2z_0)## where k is the wave number ##\lambda = 2 \pi/k##

How did they come up with that? I don't see the algebra at all.

confused.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
James Brady said:
Taking the first one, we can manipulate the square root algebraically ##z_0\sqrt{1 + (x-s/2)^2/z_0^2}##, this is where I run into issues, according to the text we can use the fact that ##\sqrt{1+a} = 1 + a/2##
That can be obtained from the binomial theorem, which is a special case of Taylor series.
James Brady said:
The book goes on to use ##2cos(\theta) = exp(i \theta) + exp(-i \theta)## to obtain a final wave equation (at the screen) of ##exp(i \theta) cos(ksx/2z_0)## where k is the wave number ##\lambda = 2 \pi/k##

How did they come up with that? I don't see the algebra at all.
Do you know Eulers identity for the complex exponential?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and James Brady
When I apply the Taylor series about x = 0:

##\frac{f(0)}{0!}0^0:####z_0 \sqrt{1 + (0-s/2)^2/z_0^2} = z_0 \sqrt{1 + (-s/2)^2/z_0^2}##
##\frac{f^{(1)}(0)}{1!}0^1:##
##\frac{0-s/2}{z_0 \sqrt{1 + (0-s/2)^2/z_0^2}}## = ##\frac{-s/2}{z_0 \sqrt{1 + (-s/2)^2/z_0^2}}##
Adding these values gives a different answer than the book.

I'm not exactly sure what a fractional binomial theorem looks look, I understand the whole number BT, but for square roots and what not I can't find a formula online.

...

I know Euler's identity ##exp(i \pi) + 1 = 0## I just don't see how that applies here.
 
You need to use the Taylor series around ##x = \frac s 2##.

You can make the calculation easier by the substitution ##a = \frac{(x -\frac s 2)^2}{z^2}##, as the book indicates. Then use the Taylor series about ##a = 0##.

Try Eulers formula!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
587
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K