Electron in constant magnetic field - classical vs quantum

grelade
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Movement of an electron in constant magnetic field, according to semiclassical QM, give rise to Landau levels - a quantization of energy. Everything would be fine but i find it difficult to reconcile these findings with classical point of view in which Lorentz force is acting on moving electron.
So, classically an electron will be moving in circular orbits according to condition:
m v^2 / r = evB
We get continuous spectrum of circular orbits each with different energy E.

However when we're considering the same situation in QM (B field in z direction) we get a wave function of the electron like this (according to wikipedia and my own calculations):
\Psi (x,y) = e^{-i k_x x} H_n(\frac{y-x_0^2 k_x}{x_0}) e^{-(\frac{y-x_0^2 k_x}{\sqrt{2} x_0})^2}<br />
,where x_0=\sqrt{\hbar/eB}.

This solution is manifestly not circular-symmetric. Which it should be according to classical point of view. So plotting |\Psi|^2 don't seems to me like having any resemblance to classical motion at all and i don't have any idea why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, in general, the quantum mechanical eigenfunctions do not correspond to classical orbits. These eigenfunctions of the Hamiltonian form a basis of the Hilbert space -- which is one reason why we work with them -- but when we take the classical limit we usually do not find that these eigenfunctions turn into classical states. One reason you pointed out -- more or less. The eigenfunctions do not always posses the symmetries of the classical action (in this case these wavefunctions break rotational symmetry). In this case the origin of this "missing" symmetry is the fact that one has to make a choice of gauge in order to solve for the eigenfunctions. Choosing a gauge will in general break one or more symmetries (you can work in the symmetric gauge which is rotationally symmetric, but then you will lose translational symmetry).

We can, however, construct an wavefunction which is "as classical as possible". These wavefunctions are called coherent states. These states localize the particle as much as possible in both coordinate and momentum space. They are constructed as some linear combination of all the eigenstates. If you want to know what these coherent states exactly look like in the QHE you should look up the notes by S.M Girvin.

One thing I should add is that these eigenfunctions in some sense correspond to a whole collection of classical orbits with a radius of roughly the magnetic length.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Back
Top