Error in book? (derivation of quantum well)

divB
Messages
85
Reaction score
0
Hi,

http://books.google.at/books?id=40rRzNbuhpAC&pg=PA146

Can anybody explain me why in the third bracket in 3.139 is suddenly a minus instead of a plus? In 3.136 it is a Plus! And it is pure substitution as far as I understand...

And I checked everything before a few times: It should be correct!

And the next crazy stuff: From where does suddenly the "i" in the numerator (3.140) appear?

Thank you :-)
divB
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi divB!

You're absolutely right. There is a plus sign in the 3rd bracket and some confusion with factors of i in (3.140).

I found a later version of his book, where the errors are corrected. I attached a bmp of the relevant page.

Enjoy the book!

Best regards Martin
 

Attachments

  • CorrectAppl.png
    CorrectAppl.png
    27.2 KB · Views: 526
GREAT! Thank you very much!

I can't believe it! It took me at least 5 hours ;-)

Thank you!
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Back
Top