Equal or larger/smaller versus larger/smaller in boundary conditions

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the boundary conditions of infinite square well problems in quantum mechanics, specifically comparing the conditions V(x) = 0 for 0 ≤ x ≤ a and V(x) = 0 for -a < x < a. Participants clarify that both scenarios lead to the same conclusion that the wave function ψ must equal zero at the boundaries, specifically ψ(-a) = ψ(a) = 0. The confusion arises from the interpretation of boundary conditions, but it is established that the physical implications remain consistent regardless of whether the inequalities are strict or inclusive.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly infinite square wells.
  • Familiarity with boundary conditions in differential equations.
  • Knowledge of wave functions and their properties in quantum systems.
  • Basic mathematical skills in inequalities and limits.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of boundary conditions in quantum mechanics.
  • Explore the mathematical derivation of wave functions in infinite square wells.
  • Learn about the differences between strict and non-strict inequalities in physical contexts.
  • Investigate other potential well problems and their boundary conditions.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to boundary conditions in wave functions.

Tokki
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
I am confused about why the two seem to be approached the same in all the solutions I have seen
Hi everyone!
This is the first time I'm posting on any forum and I'm still rather unsure of how to format so I'm sorry if it seems wonky. I'll try my best to keep the important stuff consistent!
I am working on infinite square well problems, and in the example problem:
V(x) = 0 if: 0 ≤ x ≤ a
∞ : otherwise

H`ere it is obvious that one should take ψ(a)=ψ(0)=0 and solve.

In the next example problem, however, the boundaries are shown as follows:
V(x) = 0 if: -a < x < a
∞ : otherwise

Here potential is zero if x is between (-a) and (a) but not when x is equal to (-a) or (a).
However, in the solution, the author does the same thing, making ψ(-a)=ψ(a)=0
The conditions, however, do not seem to allow this.
What am I missing?
Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Tokki said:
Summary:: I am confused about why the two seem to be approached the same in all the solutions I have seen

Hi everyone!
This is the first time I'm posting on any forum and I'm still rather unsure of how to format so I'm sorry if it seems wonky. I'll try my best to keep the important stuff consistent!
I am working on infinite square well problems, and in the example problem:
V(x) = 0 if: 0 ≤ x ≤ a
∞ : otherwise

H`ere it is obvious that one should take ψ(a)=ψ(0)=0 and solve.

In the next example problem, however, the boundaries are shown as follows:
V(x) = 0 if: -a < x < a
∞ : otherwise

Here potential is zero if x is between (-a) and (a) but not when x is equal to (-a) or (a).
However, in the solution, the author does the same thing, making ψ(-a)=ψ(a)=0
The conditions, however, do not seem to allow this.
What am I missing?
Thank you!

The two problems are physically the same, whether you have ##<## or ##\le##.

Why do you think in the second case you don't have ##\psi(-a) = \psi(a) = 0##? It can't be non-zero at these points.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K