Energy eigenvalue and mass inverse relation?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between energy eigenvalues and mass in the context of the time-independent Schrödinger equation (TISE) in non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of the derived equation for energy levels and how mass influences these values, questioning the intuitive understanding of energy in relation to mass.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the equation E = n²π²ħ²/(2mL²) and questions whether this implies that energy is inversely related to mass, expressing confusion over its implications.
  • Another participant clarifies that in non-relativistic quantum mechanics, mass is a fixed property and does not depend on energy, suggesting that the relationship is not as straightforward as it appears.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes the need to compare energy and momentum using classical expressions, noting that the quantized energy levels relate to kinetic energy and that the classical expression holds in the limit of small momentum.
  • Some participants express doubts about the meaning of the mass in the equation and its relationship to energy, particularly in the context of a particle in a potential well.
  • One participant argues that the energy of Hamiltonian eigenstates is inversely proportional to mass, reiterating that mass is a constant in quantum mechanics and does not depend on energy.
  • Concerns are raised about comparing different masses (e.g., an electron versus a 1 kg ball) using the same equation, questioning the implications of the results and the nature of wave functions for different systems.
  • Another participant responds that the comparison is flawed because the conditions for the two systems (electron and ball) are not equivalent, and discusses how energy levels differ for heavier particles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the relationship between energy and mass, with no consensus reached on the implications of the derived equation or the nature of wave functions for different masses.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in understanding the relationship between energy and mass, particularly when applying quantum mechanical principles to macroscopic objects. The assumptions regarding the systems being compared and the definitions of energy and mass are not fully resolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in physics, particularly those exploring quantum mechanics, energy concepts, and the implications of mass in different physical contexts.

AbbasB.
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
So, after time-independent 1D Schrödinger equation is solved, this is obtained

E = n2π2ħ2/(2mL2)

This means that the mass of the 'particle' is inversely related to the energy eigenvalue.
Does this mean that the actual energy of the particle is inversely related to its mass?
Isn't this counter intuitive? Doesn't E = mc2?

Put in another way, what does E mean in the first equation? Is the eigenvalue of energy different than our classical notion of energy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is non-relativistic quantum mechanics, so the energy doesn't include mc2 or a correction due to relativistic momentum. m is simply the mass of the system ("rest mass"). It is a fixed property of the system, and doesn't depend on the actual energy.
 
You are mixing special relativity and quantum mechanics in a way which is not compatible. What you should be doing is to compare the energy and momentum with the classical expressions where ##E = p^2/2m##. The quantised energy levels have ##p^2 = n^2 \pi^2 \hbar^2 /L^2##. In addition, we are here considering only kinetic energy. The classical expression also holds for the kinetic energy in relativity when the momentum is small: ##E_k = \sqrt{m^2 c^4 + p^2 c^2} - mc^2 \simeq p^2/2m##.
 
My doubt is simply the following (discounting the idea E = mc^2):
The m in the equation is the mass of the 'particle', how is it inversely related to the energy? What does the equation even mean? Also, I must add, the equation was derived when TISE was solved for a box of 1D, that is, the particle was bound in a potential well.
 
AbbasB. said:
My doubt is simply the following (discounting the idea E = mc^2):
The m in the equation is the mass of the 'particle', how is it inversely related to the energy? What does the equation even mean? Also, I must add, the equation was derived when TISE was solved for a box of 1D, that is, the particle was bound in a potential well.
You are thinking about it in the wrong way. It is the energy of the Hamiltonian eigenstates which are inversely proportional to the mass ##m## - it is not the mass which depends on ##E##. The mass is a fixed parameter in QM and your solution for the quantised energy levels depends on it.
 
Orodruin said:
You are thinking about it in the wrong way. It is the energy of the Hamiltonian eigenstates which are inversely proportional to the mass ##m## - it is not the mass which depends on ##E##. The mass is a fixed parameter in QM and your solution for the quantised energy levels depends on it.

Accepted. Okay. So, say, I come to the relation, what does it mean now? Okay, the mass is constant. But, here's the problem:
Consider two masses, one of an electron, the other of a ball of mass 1 kg.

Plug both in the same equation. I will get the value of E to be greater for an electron, and less for the ball. What will that mean? The ball obviously has more energy than the electron, then why this inverse connection? Am I still looking it in the wrong way, in that, is my conception of a wave function flawed? Both will have different wave functions, but how will they differ? Can you define a wave function for a ball (since it is a wave packet)?
 
AbbasB. said:
Accepted. Okay. So, say, I come to the relation, what does it mean now? Okay, the mass is constant. But, here's the problem:
Consider two masses, one of an electron, the other of a ball of mass 1 kg.

Plug both in the same equation. I will get the value of E to be greater for an electron, and less for the ball. What will that mean? The ball obviously has more energy than the electron, then why this inverse connection? Am I still looking it in the wrong way, in that, is my conception of a wave function flawed? Both will have different wave functions, but how will they differ? Can you define a wave function for a ball (since it is a wave packet)?
It means nothing because you cannot constrain the ball to be in the same type of microscopic box as an electron. Also note that these are the energy eigenstates of the particle - it only tells you which energy values are allowed for the particle. For a larger mass, it only means that the distance between energy levels is smaller because the same change in momentum results in a lower change in the energy for a heavy particle.

I have also changed the thread level to "I". Note that labelling a thread "A" means that you would like the discussion to be at the level understandable by a graduate student in physics.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: AbbasB.
Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K