Expectation value of Coulomb potential depends on relative spin

In summary, the expectation value of the Coulomb potential between two electrons depends on the relative orientation of spin of the two electrons, as shown by the different results obtained for the singlet and triplet states. This is due to Fermi-Dirac statistics and the symmetric and antisymmetric nature of the wavefunctions.
  • #1
Bill Foster
338
0

Homework Statement



Show that the expectation value of the Coulomb potential [tex]v(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2})=\frac{e^2}{|\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2}|}[/tex], between two electrons depends on the relative orientation of spin of the two electrons. Assume each electron is in the product state form [tex]\phi(\vec{r})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s)[/tex].

Homework Equations




[tex]<A>_\phi = <\phi|A|\phi>[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



No attempt as I don't even know where to start.

I'm guessing that somehow I have to write the Coulomb potential as an operator. And the two electrons as a state, and then use the equation for expectation value above.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You just have to integrate. phi_1*x phi_2*x v x phi_1 x phi_2
 
  • #3
If I'm looking for the expectation value of x of a wave function...

[tex]\langle x \rangle = \int x|\Psi\left(x\right)|^2dx[/tex]

In this case, "x" is "v". And the wave function is a function of two electrons, one at [tex]r_1[/tex] with spin [tex]s_1[/tex] and one at [tex]r_2[/tex] with spin [tex]s_2[/tex].

To integrate over all v, I would have to integrate over all space, [tex]r_1[/tex] and [tex]r_2[/tex].

So there's something like this: [tex]dv \rightarrow d^3r[/tex].

So I set up the integral as...
[tex]\int d^3r \left(\phi(\vec{r_1})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_1)\right)^\dagger\left(\phi(\vec{r_2})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_2)\right)^\dagger \frac{e^2}{|\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2}|} \left(\phi(\vec{r_1})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_1)\right)\left(\phi(\vec{r_2})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_2)\right)[/tex]
[tex]=e^2\int d^3r \frac{1}{|\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2}|} |\phi(\vec{r_1})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_1)\phi(\vec{r_2})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_2)|^2[/tex]
[tex]=e^2\int d^3r \frac{1}{|\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2}|} |\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_1)\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_2)|^2\delta_{r_1r_2}[/tex]

It looks like the expectation value is zero unless r1 = r2. That doesn't seem right to me.
 
  • #4
You cannot eliminate the phi wavefunctions like that. They are a functions of r_1 and r_2.
 
  • #5
How about this?

[tex]
=e^2\int d^3r \frac{1}{|\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2}|} |\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_1)\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_2)| ^2\delta\left(r_1-r_2\right)
[/tex]
 
  • #6
No. You cannot do that. You can't just eliminate the spatial part of the wavefunctions as i said.
 
  • #7
The integral is

[tex]\int d^3 r ... \to\int d^3 r_1 d^3 r_2 ... [/tex]

Since the r_1 and r_2 are in the coulomb potential itself you cannot simply eliminate the spatial wave functions.
 
  • #8
Assuming the wave functions are normalized, then if we integrate them over all space, don't they become 1?
 
  • #9
Yes but we can't integrate them, as the variable they depend on is also in another term in the integrand i.e. in the coulomb potential, so we can't simply integrate them. Thats what i was talking about for the last few posts...
 
  • #10
Then what's the next step?
 
  • #11
Ok. So then first of all you will have to write up those single electron wavefunctions as the product.
Best is to change to spherical coordinates and write them as the product of a function depending on r and another function depending on the angles.
Assuming that the potential in which the wavefunctions were calculated are spherically symmetric (why not..), the angle part will be the spherical harmonics.

So u will have something like this: Phi(vector r) = R(r)*Y_lm(theta,phi)

Next use the multipole expansion to express the inverse distance 1/r as the sum of the product of the spherical harmonics.

Now plug all this back into the integral.
 
  • #12
Thaakisfox said:
Ok. So then first of all you will have to write up those single electron wavefunctions as the product.

[tex]\phi(\vec{r_1})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_1)\phi(\vec{ r_2})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s_2) = \psi\left(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2}\right)\chi\left(s_1,s_2\right)[/tex]

Best is to change to spherical coordinates and write them as the product of a function depending on r and another function depending on the angles.
Assuming that the potential in which the wavefunctions were calculated are spherically symmetric (why not..), the angle part will be the spherical harmonics.

So u will have something like this: Phi(vector r) = R(r)*Y_lm(theta,phi)

[tex]\psi\left(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2}\right)\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}\left(s_1,s_2\right)=R\left(r\right)Y_l^m\left(\theta,\phi\right)\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}\left(s_1,s_2\right)[/tex]

Next use the multipole expansion to express the inverse distance 1/r as the sum of the product of the spherical harmonics.

Let one electron be at the origin, so the potential is:

[tex]\frac{e^2}{|r|} = e^2\sum_{j=1}^\infty \sum_{l=0}^\infty \sum_{m=-l}^l \frac{D_{l,j}^m}{r^j}Y_l^m\left(\theta,\phi\right)[/tex]

Now plug all this back into the integral.

[tex]\int d^3r e^2\sum_{j=1}^\infty \sum_{l=0}^\infty \sum_{m=-l}^l \frac{D_{l,j}^m}{r^j}Y_l^m\left(\theta,\phi\right)|R\left(r\right)Y_l^m\left(\theta,\phi\right)\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}\left(s_1,s_2\right)|^2[/tex]
 
  • #13
Well, we're going about this all wrong. We don't need to evaluate this integral. We need to calculate the matrix elements. They will show that the Coulomb interaction depends on spin.

So...how about some help with evaluating the matrix elements?
 
  • #14
I'm not sure how to evaluate the matrix elements, but suppose I put one electron at the origin, so instead of r_1 and r_2, I have one variable r.

Then I have:

[tex]V\left(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2}\right) = \frac{e^2}{|\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2}|}[/tex]

this becomes:

[tex]V\left(\vec{r}\right) = \frac{e^2}{|\vec{r}|}[/tex]

Then I can write the two wave functions as:

[tex]|r,s_1,s_2\rangle[/tex]

So then I need to evaluate the matrix elements of:

[tex]\langle r,s_1,s_2|\frac{e^2}{|r|}|r,s_1,s_2 \rangle[/tex]

Am I on the right track here?
 
  • #15
Now I don't feel so bad. Evidently, nobody else knows how to do this either.
 
  • #16
Bill Foster said:

Homework Statement



Show that the expectation value of the Coulomb potential [tex]v(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2})=\frac{e^2}{|\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2}|}[/tex], between two electrons depends on the relative orientation of spin of the two electrons. Assume each electron is in the product state form [tex]\phi(\vec{r})\chi_{\frac{1}{2}m}(s)[/tex].

Homework Equations




[tex]<A>_\phi = <\phi|A|\phi>[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



No attempt as I don't even know where to start.

I'm guessing that somehow I have to write the Coulomb potential as an operator. And the two electrons as a state, and then use the equation for expectation value above.


(Note, the argument below is essentially the same as found in Sakurai's discussion of the Helium atom.)

Since the Coulomb potential commutes with the spin operators, we can almost neglect the spin computations in the matrix element. However, Fermi-Dirac statistic comes into play when we consider the wavefunctions.

Let the spatial wavefunctions be [tex]\phi_0(\vec{r})[/tex], where n refers to some quantum numbers. We'll take [tex]\phi_n(\vec{r})[/tex] to be the ground state.

We first consider the case when both electrons are in the ground state. Then by Fermi statistics, the spins must be opposite, so the spin state is the singlet. The 2-particle wavefunction is

[tex]\phi(\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2) = \phi_0(\vec{r}_1)\phi_0(\vec{r}_2) \chi_s(s_1,s_2).[/tex]

There's no spin dependence of

[tex]\langle v(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2}) \rangle [/tex]

for this configuration.

Let's then consider the case where one electron is in the ground state and the other is in some excited state. The spins can either be opposite (singlet) or the same (triplet). For the singlet state the spatial part is symmetric:

[tex]\phi_+(\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2) =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2} }(\phi_0(\vec{r}_1)\phi_n(\vec{r}_2) + \phi_0(\vec{r}_2)\phi_n(\vec{r}_1) )\chi_s(s_1,s_2).[/tex]

For the spin triplet, since the spins are symmetric, the spatial part must be antisymmetric:

[tex]\phi_-(\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\phi_0(\vec{r}_1)\phi_n(\vec{r}_2) -\phi_0(\vec{r}_2)\phi_n(\vec{r}_1) )\chi_t(s_1,s_2).[/tex]

Now we can compute

[tex]\langle v(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2}) \rangle_+ = \int d\vec{r}_1d\vec{r}_2 \phi_+^*(\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2) v(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2}) \phi_+(\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2) = I + J [/tex]

where

[tex] I = \int d\vec{r}_1d\vec{r}_2 v(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2}) |\phi_0(\vec{r}_1)|^2|\phi_n(\vec{r}_2)|^2,[/tex]

[tex]J = \int d\vec{r}_1d\vec{r}_2 v(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2}) \phi_0^*(\vec{r}_1)\phi_0(\vec{r}_2) \phi_n^*(\vec{r}_2)\phi_n(\vec{r}_1).[/tex]

However, for the triplet state, we find

[tex]\langle v(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2}) \rangle_- = I - J. [/tex]

So the spin dependence follows from spin statistics and not from any interaction term. Physically the reason is that when the electrons are in the triplet state, the spatial dependence is antisymmetric and the probability of finding the electrons close to one another is small. The electrostatic repulsion is minimized and the energy of the triplet state is lower than that of the singlet state. In the singlet state, the spatial function is symmetric and there is a high probability to find the electrons close to one another. Therefore the electrons see a higher electrostatic repulsion than in the triplet state.
 

FAQ: Expectation value of Coulomb potential depends on relative spin

What is the expectation value of Coulomb potential?

The expectation value of Coulomb potential is the average value of the potential energy experienced by an electron due to the interaction with a charged particle, such as a proton. It is calculated by taking the product of the Coulomb potential and the probability of finding the electron in a particular quantum state, summed over all possible quantum states.

How does the expectation value of Coulomb potential depend on relative spin?

The expectation value of Coulomb potential depends on relative spin because the spin of an electron affects its spatial wavefunction, which in turn affects the probability of finding the electron at a particular distance from a charged particle. Therefore, the spin of the electron influences the probability of interaction with the Coulomb potential and thus affects the expectation value.

What is the significance of the expectation value of Coulomb potential in quantum mechanics?

The expectation value of Coulomb potential is significant in quantum mechanics because it allows us to predict the average potential energy of an electron in a given quantum state. This information is essential in understanding the behavior of electrons and their interactions with charged particles.

How is the expectation value of Coulomb potential calculated?

The expectation value of Coulomb potential is calculated using the Schrödinger equation, which describes the behavior of quantum systems. The equation is solved for the wavefunction, and then the Coulomb potential is multiplied by the wavefunction squared and integrated over all space to obtain the expectation value.

Can the expectation value of Coulomb potential be negative?

Yes, the expectation value of Coulomb potential can be negative. This occurs when the wavefunction of the electron has a negative sign in certain regions, resulting in a negative contribution to the expectation value. However, the negative value does not have a physical meaning and is only a mathematical result.

Similar threads

Back
Top