Expectation value for a position measurement

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the expectation value <x> and the rms spread ΔE for a given wave function in an infinite potential well. The user initially attempts to find <E> using the coefficients of the wave function but is corrected on the need to convert these coefficients into probabilities. To simplify the calculation of ΔE, it is suggested to express E2 in terms of E1, allowing for a clearer formulation of <E> and <E2>. The user expresses confusion over whether to focus on position measurement or energy measurement, indicating a need for clarification on the primary objective. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly interpreting wave function coefficients for accurate calculations.
SkyChaser
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Given the wave function psi(x,0) = 3/5 sqrt(2/L) sin(xpi/L) + 4/5 sqrt(2/L) sin(5xpi/L) in an infinite potential well from 0 to L, what is the expectation value <x> and rms spread delta E = sqrt(<E^2>-<E>^2)


Homework Equations


<x> = integral from 0 to L of psi*xpsi dx


The Attempt at a Solution


I know that the expectation value <E> is just 3/5 E1 + 4/5 E2, however I'm not sure how to find the rms spread of it without cumbersome algebra. And the same with <x>.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello, SkyChaser.

Your answer for <E> is not correct. Think about what you need to do to the coefficients 3/5 and 4/5 to get the probabilities.

The algebra for the rms spread of E will be less cumbersome if you express E2 as a multiple of E1 and then express <E> and <E2> in terms of just E1.
 
I'm confused. Your title says "position measurement" but you refer to both x and E. To clarify, which one do you want: <x> or <E>? Δx or ΔE?
 
Both. And yeah, it should be 9/25 E1 + 16/25 E2.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top