Eigenfunction of momentum and operators

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of momentum eigenfunctions and the completeness relation in quantum mechanics. Participants are examining the momentum operator and its application to wavefunctions, particularly in the context of free particles.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the application of the momentum operator to derive eigenfunctions and question how to demonstrate the completeness relation for specific expressions. There is discussion on the distinction between wavefunctions and state representations, as well as the role of parameters in the completeness relation.

Discussion Status

The conversation is active, with participants offering guidance on how to approach the completeness relation and clarifying the definitions of terms. There is an ongoing exploration of how to connect wavefunctions to the completeness relation without reaching a definitive conclusion.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express confusion regarding the relationship between specific wavefunctions and the completeness relation, indicating a need for further clarification on the underlying concepts and definitions in quantum mechanics.

Philip Land
Messages
56
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


Skärmavbild 2018-10-19 kl. 20.28.10.png

Homework Equations


##\hat{P}= -ih d/dx##

The Attempt at a Solution



To actually obtain ##\psi_{p_0}## I guess one can apply the momentum operator on the spatial wavefunction. If we consider a free particle (V=0) we can easily get obtain ##\psi = e^{\pm i kx}##, where ##k= \sqrt{2mE/ \hbar}##.

By now applying momentum operator we get ##\hat{P} \psi= -ih \cdot \pm i \sqrt{2mE/ \hbar} ##. This is as far as I get, how do I actually get the eigenfunction of momentum on the required form?

And 2:
How do I show that the completeness relation is satisfied for that 'specific' expression? I know that we can express ##|x> = \int dp |p><p|x>,##take ##-i \hbar \frac{d}{d_x} f_p(x) = p f_p(x)## and turn into a Fourier transformation (including k in the kernel) and get ##p' \tilde{f_p(p')}## which can be solved picking p=p' and any function of p can be converted into an eigenfunction if we transform back to x s.t ##f_p(x) = \int dp e^{ipx \hbar} \tilde{f_p(p)}##, but I have no idea how to use this to confirm the completeness relation for the above expression...
 

Attachments

  • Skärmavbild 2018-10-19 kl. 20.11.08.png
    Skärmavbild 2018-10-19 kl. 20.11.08.png
    25.2 KB · Views: 1,203
  • Skärmavbild 2018-10-19 kl. 20.28.10.png
    Skärmavbild 2018-10-19 kl. 20.28.10.png
    10.2 KB · Views: 985
Physics news on Phys.org
1) You do not need to derive the eigenfunction. Just show that the given function is the eigenfunction.

2) You need to show that ##\int |p\rangle \langle p| dp## is the identity operator, i.e., that acting on any state with it gives back the same state.
 
Ahh okey, that made the first part very easy.

Orodruin said:
2) You need to show that ∫|p⟩⟨p|dp∫|p⟩⟨p|dp\int |p\rangle \langle p| dp is the identity operator, i.e., that acting on any state with it gives back the same state.

And on 2) what exactly is p in that equation?
 
It is just a parameter labelling the momentum eigenstates.
 
Orodruin said:
It is just a parameter labelling the momentum eigenstates.
Okey, so I'm a bit confused about the state vs ##\psi_{p_0}## which is a function. Could I rewrite the function as a state somehow?
 
Philip Land said:
Okey, so I'm a bit confused about the state vs ##\psi_{p_0}## which is a function. Could I rewrite the function as a state somehow?
Because plugging in ##\psi## in the equation returns ##p_0^2 / \hbar \cdot \int dp. ##
 
The wave function ##\psi(x)## for any state ##|\psi\rangle## is defined as ##\psi(x) = \langle x|\psi\rangle##.
 
Oki I see. Are there way to get p for this specific case which I ultimately can plug into the completeness theorem?
 
There is no specific p. The ##p## in the completeness relation is an integration variable.
 
  • #10
Orodruin said:
There is no specific p. The ##p## in the completeness relation is an integration variable.
If there's no specific, p, how can I check it for a specific case?
 
  • #11
You should not be checking it for a specific case. You should show that it is always the identity operator.
 
  • #12
Orodruin said:
You should not be checking it for a specific case. You should show that it is always the identity operator.
"Show that the expression above satisfies it"
 
  • #13
Philip Land said:
"Show that the expression above satisfies it"
Yes? You are still not understanding the question correctly. The wavefunction you are given is the wavefunction corresponding to the state ##|p_0\rangle##. You need to show that the states with this type of wavefunction lead to the states satisfying the completeness relation.
 
  • #14
Orodruin said:
Yes? You are still not understanding the question correctly. The wavefunction you are given is the wavefunction corresponding to the state ##|p_0\rangle##. You need to show that the states with this type of wavefunction lead to the states satisfying the completeness relation.
Cheers. Yes the reason I ask is that I obviously don't understand it.
 
  • #15
That the wavefunction of the momentum states is ##\psi_{p_0}(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\hbar}} e^{ip_0x/\hbar}## by definition means that
$$
\langle x|p_0\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\hbar}} e^{ip_0x/\hbar}.
$$
From this and the completeness relation for ##|x\rangle##, i.e.,
$$
\int |x\rangle \langle x| dx = 1,
$$
you should be able to show the states ##|p\rangle## with the above wavefunction satisfy the completeness relation. You can do this by showing that
$$
\langle x|\psi\rangle = \int \langle x|p \rangle \langle p |\psi \rangle dp
$$
for any state ##|\psi\rangle##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K