Energy of a number of particles

In summary, when a sum of weighted wavefunctions makes sense, it is in a stationary state where there is negligible potential energy.
  • #1
EmilyRuck
136
6
Hello!
It is sometimes useful to find the average energy of a certain number [itex]N[/itex] of particles contained in a box of volume [itex]V[/itex].
In order to find this quantity, the total energy is required and then divided by [itex]N[/itex]. The result is

[itex]E_{average} = \displaystyle \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n = 1}^{N} \left| a_n \right|^2 E_n[/itex]

where [itex]\left| a_n \right|^2[/itex] is the probability, for the [itex]n[/itex]-th particle, of having energy [itex]E_n[/itex].
If the wavefunction related to the [itex]n[/itex]-th particle is [itex]\psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t)[/itex], a total wavefunction can be built:

[itex]\psi (\mathbf{r}, t) = \displaystyle \sum_{n = 1}^N a_n \psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t)[/itex]

and the above result is obtained by computing the energy of this (global) wavefunction, divided by [itex]N[/itex]:

[itex]E_{average} = \displaystyle \frac{1}{N} \int_{V} \psi^* (\mathbf{r}, t) \mathcal{H} \psi (\mathbf{r}, t) dV = \displaystyle \frac{1}{N} \int_{V} \psi^* (\mathbf{r}, t) \mathcal{H} \left( \displaystyle \sum_{n = 1}^N a_n \psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t) \right) dV =[/itex]

[itex]= \displaystyle \frac{1}{N} \int_{V} \psi^* (\mathbf{r}, t) \left( \displaystyle \sum_{n = 1}^N a_n E_n \psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t) \right) dV = \displaystyle \frac{1}{N} \int_{V} \left( \sum_{m = 1}^N a_m^* \psi_m^* (\mathbf{r}, t) \right) \left( \displaystyle \sum_{n = 1}^N a_n E_n \psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t) \right) dV[/itex]

(and then the orthonormality of the [itex]\psi_n[/itex] must be used).

[itex]E_n[/itex] is the energy related to the [itex]n[/itex]-th wavefunction, that is the eigenvalue of the hamiltonian

[itex]\mathcal{H} \psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t) = E_n \psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t)[/itex]

But if the single [itex]\psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t)[/itex] must satisfy by itself the normalization condition

[itex]\displaystyle \int_{V} \left| \psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t) \right|^2 dV = 1[/itex]

why an [itex]a_n[/itex] has to be used? I've not found this computation on the web, but just in some notes.
If the total number of particles is [itex]N[/itex] and the [itex]n[/itex]-th particle must have its own wavefunction
[itex]\psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t)[/itex], how can we consider a probability that the particle will have this wavefunction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
EmilyRuck said:
If the wavefunction related to the [itex]n[/itex]-th particle is [itex]\psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t)[/itex], a total wavefunction can be built:

[itex]\psi (\mathbf{r}, t) = \displaystyle \sum_{n = 1}^N a_n \psi_n (\mathbf{r}, t)[/itex]
The above lines do not look fine to me. ##\psi_n## is the wavefunction of a single particle, and then you construct the wavefunction of the entire particles as a linear combination of the wavefunction of individual particles. Is it your own proposal or did you read it somewhere?
 
Last edited:
  • #3
blue_leaf77 said:
The above lines do not look fine to me. ##\psi_n## is the wavefunction of a single particle, and then you construct the wavefunction of the entire particles as a linear combination of the wavefunction of individual particles. Is it you own proposal or did you read it somewhere?

I read it in the notes I found. The entire computation is made through the use of such a ##\psi##. I can understand your doubt. If you should solve the same problem, how could you suggest to proceed instead?
 
  • #4
EmilyRuck said:
I read it in the notes I found. The entire computation is made through the use of such a ##\psi##. I can understand your doubt. If you should solve the same problem, how could you suggest to proceed instead?
I think the system can be modeled as 3D infinite well problem. So that the Hamiltonian should look like
$$
H = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\sum_{i=1}^N \nabla_i^2 + \sum_{i<j} k\frac{e^2}{|\mathbf{r}_i - \mathbf{r}_j|}
$$
(I have assumed that all particles are identical). It's very difficult, if not impossible, to solve the Schroedinger equation corresponding to the above Hamiltonian. However, if for some reason, the second term which is the interaction potential between the particles can be neglected, then the solution takes a simple form
$$
\psi_{n_1n_2\ldots n_N}(\mathbf{r}_1,\mathbf{r}_2,\ldots,\mathbf{r}_N) = \prod_{i=1}^N \psi_{n_i}(\mathbf{r}_i)
$$
where ##\psi(\mathbf{r}_i)## is a solution of ##-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \nabla_i^2 \psi_{n_i}(\mathbf{r}_i)= E_{n_i}\psi_{n_i}(\mathbf{r}_i)##. Now depending on whether the particle belongs to boson or fermion, the proper wavefunction must be symmetrized or antisymmetrized.
 
  • #5
blue_leaf77 said:
if for some reason, the second term which is the interaction potential between the particles can be neglected

Yes, it is certainly neglected to simplify the problem, with no interaction between particles.
I forgot to say that the system (the box with the particles inside) is in the stationary state. Each particle has a stable behaviour with a well-defined wavefunction and a well-defined time dependance. So, with the following two hypotheses
  • stationary state
  • negligible potential
is it possible to have a wavefunction which is the sum of the [itex]\psi_n[/itex] instead of a product? Or in other words: when does a sum of weighted wavefunctions

$$\psi = \displaystyle \sum_{n = 1}^N a_n \psi_n$$

make sense in such a problem?
 
  • #6
EmilyRuck said:
is it possible to have a wavefunction which is the sum of the ψnψn\psi_n instead of a product? Or in other words: when does a sum of weighted wavefunctions

ψ=N∑n=1anψnψ=∑n=1Nanψn​
\psi = \displaystyle \sum_{n = 1}^N a_n \psi_n

make sense in such a problem?
No, that's not possible. Such a wavefunction formed by summing individual particle's eigenfunctions is not a stationary state as you required. A stationary state is the solution of the equation
$$
-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\sum_{i=1}^N \nabla_i^2 \psi_{n_1n_2\ldots n_N} = E_{n_1n_2\ldots n_N} \psi_{n_1n_2\ldots n_N}
$$
with ##E_{n_1n_2\ldots n_N} = \sum_{i=1}^N E_{n_i}##. You can see the the summed wavefunction does not satisfy that Schroedinger equation by plugging it in.
 
  • #7
EmilyRuck said:
Hello!
It is sometimes useful to find the average energy of a certain number [itex]N[/itex] of particles contained in a box of volume [itex]V[/itex].
Hi,
What process let's you know that there are N particles in the box ? Are you reversing the Rydberg atom counting process as it is populated in application of decoherence methods ?
 
  • #8
Igael said:
Hi,
What process let's you know that there are N particles in the box ? Are you reversing the Rydberg atom counting process as it is populated in application of decoherence methods ?

No, it was originally a simple example to show the average energy of a certain number [itex]N[/itex] of charge carriers (electrons, for example) enclosed in a box.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
blue_leaf77 said:
No, that's not possible [...] A stationary state is the solution of the equation
$$
-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\sum_{i=1}^N \nabla_i^2 \psi_{n_1n_2\ldots n_N} = E_{n_1n_2\ldots n_N} \psi_{n_1n_2\ldots n_N}
$$
with ##E_{n_1n_2\ldots n_N} = \sum_{i=1}^N E_{n_i}##. You can see the the summed wavefunction does not satisfy that Schroedinger equation by plugging it in.

I trust in your statements, but I can't immediately see that the summed wavefunction is not a solution of that equation. This is a first issue.
A second issue is: what if we considered [itex]N[/itex] not as the number of the particles, but something like the number of the possible states of a single particle into the box? In that case, it would make sense having a probability [itex]a_n[/itex] that the single particle will have that state (as I specified in the first post) and maybe the summed wavefunction itself may be acceptable.
 
  • #10
EmilyRuck said:
I trust in your statements, but I can't immediately see that the summed wavefunction is not a solution of that equation. This is a first issue.
Consider a simple example of two, non-interacting particles. The corresponding Schroedinger equation will be
$$
-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\left( \nabla_1^2 + \nabla_2^2 \right) \psi(\mathbf{r_1},\mathbf{r_2}) = (E_{n_1}+E_{n_2})\psi(\mathbf{r_1},\mathbf{r_2})
$$
Now substitute ##\psi(\mathbf{r_1},\mathbf{r_2}) = a_1\psi_{n_1}(\mathbf{r_1}) + a_2\psi_{n_2}(\mathbf{r_2})## into the above equation and check if it is the solution or not.
EmilyRuck said:
A second issue is: what if we considered $N$ not as the number of the particles, but something like the number of the possible states of a single particle into the box? In that case, it would make sense having a probability $a_n$ that the single particle will have that state (as I specified in the first post) and maybe the summed wavefunction itself may be less weird than now.
What do you actually want to calculate? Stationary states or just arbitrary states? Even if the problem is just that of a single particle, a linear combination of the possible stationary states is in general not a stationary state (it is when the stationary states being summed are degenerate states), it's just some wavefunction that satisfies the time-dependent Schroedinger equation.
Moreover, if you consider ##N## as a number of states of a single particle, then the Schroedinger equation will also look entirely different. It will contain only one term in the summation of the momentum operators - you are shifting to an entirely different problem.
 
  • #11
blue_leaf77 said:
Even if the problem is just that of a single particle, a linear combination of the possible stationary states is in general not a stationary state (it is when the stationary states being summed are degenerate states)
[...]
you are shifting to an entirely different problem.

Ok and thank you. It was just an attempt. I will spend some time to exactly report the notes I have, by translating them and reporting all the words. At the end of the post, I wrote my questions.Energy of a system of particles
Suppose that a certain volume [itex]V[/itex] contains [itex]N[/itex] electrons. Let's measure the energy of the whole system.
Since every particle is characterized by its own probability density [itex]\left| \psi_n \right|^2[/itex], it is legitimate to suppose that the total energy can be expressed as a sum of the energies of each electron, weighted by the probability that a particle has to be in that particular energy value (that is: if [itex]|a_n|^2[/itex] is the probability that the [itex]n[/itex]-th particle has energy [itex]E_n[/itex], then the weighted sum [itex]\sum_n a_n E_n[/itex] can be used to express the total energy of the system). [1]
Supposing that we are in the stationary state, the whole system will be in a defined state and every particle will be characterized by its own value of energy. [2]
Let's write the wavefunction of the system [itex]\psi[/itex] as linear combination of the functions of each particle in the stationary state:

[itex]\psi(\mathbf{r}, t) = \sum_{n = 1}^N a_n \psi_n (\mathbf{r},t)[/itex]

where
[itex]|a_n|^2[/itex] is the probability that a particle is in the [itex]n[/itex]-th energy state. [3]
Let's introduce the normalizations

[itex]\displaystyle \int_V \left| \psi_n(\mathbf{r}, t) \right|^2 dV = 1[/itex]

[itex]\displaystyle \int_V \left| \psi(\mathbf{r}, t) \right|^2 dV = N[/itex]

where [itex]V[/itex] is the volume enclosing the [itex]N[/itex] particles, as said before. Because the functions [itex]\psi_n[/itex] are the eigenfunctions of the time-independent Schrödinger equation

[itex]H \psi_n = E_n \psi_n[/itex]

they form an orthonormal basis.
The expected value for the energy of the whole system is defined as

[itex]E_{average} = \left \langle E \right \rangle = \displaystyle \frac{\left \langle \psi, H \psi \right \rangle}{\left \langle \psi, \psi \right \rangle}[/itex]

and then the integral in the first post is written.
The obtained result is the sum of the eigenvalues (energies of the particles), weighted on the squared magnitude of each wavefunction. Differently from Classical Mechanics, here a discrete set of energy levels appears; when the number of particles is high, the discrete levels increase and become so close to each other, becoming very similar to a continuum.[1] and [2] seem contradicting statements. If every particle is in a stationary state, isn't its energy well-defined? I can't understand why a probability is needed here. The probability that the [itex]n[/itex]-th particle has its energy [itex]E_n[/itex] should be 1!
[3] Again. [itex]|a_n|^2[/itex] may mean that there is no certainty that a particle is occupying the [itex]n[/itex]-th energy state. But if the total number of particles is [itex]N[/itex] and the [itex]n[/itex]-th particle is not occupying the [itex]n[/itex]-th energy state, which energy state will it occupy?!

So, this computation is finally used to show that a great number of discrete, possible energy states can lead to a continuum, so that Quantum Mechanics gives results close to Classical Mechanics when the number of particles is high.

Have you ever seen something similar? If you know some links or references, I'll check them out.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
EmilyRuck said:
Let's write the wavefunction of the system [itex]\psi[/itex] as linear combination of the functions of each particle in the stationary state:

[itex]\psi(\mathbf{r}, t) = \sum_{n = 1}^N a_n \psi_n (\mathbf{r},t)[/itex]
Can you mention the source from which you got that equation?
 
  • #13
I have it by way of notes. I just suppose that these notes are based on an Italian textbook, which I have not found in Amazon. It deals with Quantum Mechanics in order to deal with laser and optic signals transmission.
 
  • #14
EmilyRuck said:
I just suppose that these notes are based on an Italian textbook
Do you mean you actually copied that equation from this book you are talking about into your note? Are you sure that you are copying the right thing for your present need?
 
  • #15
Perhaps we we need to distinguish between the general case (where the atom may be excited) and the ground state (when it is not)?
 
  • #16
blue_leaf77 said:
Do you mean you actually copied that equation from this book you are talking about into your note? Are you sure that you are copying the right thing for your present need?

I copied it from some photocopies. Moreover, I have compared the equation with another guy's notes and it is the same. So I am sure that the equation is the same as in the original, and yes, it is about the matter I needed.
 

1. What is the definition of "Energy of a number of particles"?

The energy of a number of particles refers to the total amount of energy possessed by a system of multiple particles, which can include both kinetic and potential energy.

2. How is the energy of a number of particles calculated?

The energy of a number of particles can be calculated by summing up the individual energies of each particle in the system. This can be done using equations such as the kinetic energy equation (KE = 1/2mv^2) and potential energy equation (PE = mgh).

3. What factors can affect the energy of a number of particles?

The energy of a number of particles can be affected by factors such as the mass and velocity of each individual particle, as well as any external forces acting on the system.

4. How does the energy of a number of particles change over time?

The energy of a number of particles can change over time due to interactions between particles, as well as the conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy and vice versa. The total energy of the system remains constant, but the distribution of energy among particles may change.

5. Can the energy of a number of particles be converted into other forms of energy?

Yes, the energy of a number of particles can be converted into other forms of energy through various processes. For example, the kinetic energy of particles can be converted into heat energy through collisions, or the potential energy of particles in a gravitational field can be converted into kinetic energy as they fall. This is known as the law of conservation of energy.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
701
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
8
Views
7K
Replies
5
Views
914
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
9
Views
793
Replies
2
Views
576
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
19
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Back
Top