Doubts in a lattice translation example

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of quantum states in periodic potentials, specifically in the context of an electron in a lattice as described in Sakurai's quantum mechanics book. Participants explore the implications of infinite versus finite potential barriers on the localization of states and their energy eigenstate characteristics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why a localized state ##|n \rangle##, where the electron is confined to the ##n##th site, is considered the lowest energy state when the potential goes to infinity.
  • Another participant explains that when the potential is infinite, the wave function must go to zero outside the potential well, making a localized solution compatible with the Hamiltonian.
  • A further example is provided regarding a rectangular wave potential, where localized solutions can be eigenstates of the Hamiltonian if they are confined to regions where the potential is zero.
  • Another participant discusses a double infinite square well scenario, noting that the ground state wavefunction can be localized in the wider box, but if probability is equally distributed, the state does not remain an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian due to differing time-dependent phase factors.
  • There is a curiosity expressed about other systems where time-independent probability density does not imply that the state is an energy eigenstate.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of localized states and their energy characteristics in infinite versus finite potentials. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these states and the conditions under which they are considered eigenstates of the Hamiltonian.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of potential barriers and their effects on the localization of wave functions, but do not resolve the underlying assumptions or conditions that lead to their conclusions.

Lebnm
Messages
29
Reaction score
1
I have two question about a exemple given in the Sakurai's quantum mechanics book, section 4.3. Let's consider an electron in a periodic potential ##V(x + a) = V(x)##, that has the form of a wave. We will take the potential to go to infinity between two latteces sites, such that its form change to something like this : ...U U U U U U ... In this case, the book says that one possible candidate to the ground state of the system is a state ##|n \rangle## where the electron is completely localized in the ##n##th site, and so we have ##\hat{H}|n\rangle = E_{0} |n \rangle##. But why? I can't see why this state have to be the lowest energy state.
The second question is: Let's go back to the first case, where the potential is finite. In this case, the states ##|n \rangle## are not more hamiltonian eigenstates, that is, ##H## is not diagonal in this basis. I also don't understend why this happen. This seems intuitive, but I can't find a good reason for this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When the potential goes to infinity, the wave function goes to zero. Therefore, a localized solution, for which the wave function must go to zero outside one potential well (otherwise, it is not localized), is compatible with the full Hamiltonian. This is no longer the case when the potential barrier between wells is finite.
 
For example, in a system where the potential is a rectangular wave of infinite amplitude:

##V(x) = 0\hspace{20pt}## when ##\hspace{20pt}\sin\left(\frac{2\pi x}{a}\right)<0##, and

##V(x) = \infty\hspace{20pt}## when ##\hspace{20pt}\sin\left(\frac{2\pi x}{a}\right)\geq 0##,

any solution where the ##\psi (x)## is one of the particle-in-box eigenstates on one of the intervals where ##V(x)=0## and ##\psi (x)## is zero everywhere else, is an eigenstate of the full hamiltonian. If ##\psi (x)\neq 0## on more than one interval, it has to be the same particle-in-box eigenstate on all of them.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lebnm and DrClaude
Actually, there's something quite special about this kind of systems... Suppose I have a double infinite square well, where the width of the left "box" is ##L_1## and that of the right box is ##L_2##. The ground state wavefunction is such that all probability density is in the box of longer width, and is there the same as for the ground state of a normal particle-in-a-box system.

Now, if ##L_1 \neq L_2## and I put equal amounts of probability in both boxes, with the wavefunctions coinciding with the ground states of ordinary particle in box systems with those widths, then the probability density ##|\psi (x,t)|^2## will be time-independent but the state is not an eigenstate of ##H## because the time dependent phase factor ##e^{-iEt/\hbar}## is not the same in the left and right compartments.

I wonder if there are any other systems where ##\frac{\partial |\psi (x,t)|^2}{\partial t} = 0## does not imply that ##\psi (x,t)## is an energy eigenstate?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lebnm
thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K