Expectation values for expanded wave functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the notation and mathematical treatment of wave functions expressed as linear combinations of an orthonormal basis set in quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of using different indices in summations when calculating expectation values, particularly focusing on the inner product involving the operator and the wave function.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the use of different indices (n and m) in the summation when calculating the expectation value of an operator for a wave function expressed as a linear combination of basis functions.
  • Another participant argues that the use of different indices is simply a matter of algebraic expansion and not specific to quantum mechanics, illustrating with a general algebraic example.
  • A participant questions the necessity of using different indices for what they perceive as the same wave function, suggesting that it leads to confusion.
  • Another participant reiterates that the different indices are standard practice in summation notation and are necessary for clarity in the expansion of products of sums.
  • One participant links the discussion to a derivation of the variational method, noting the interchangeable use of indices in that context as well.
  • Another participant provides a personal view on the role of indices in quantum mechanics, relating them to the representation of states and basis functions.
  • A final comment compares quantum basis states to a quantum coin toss, suggesting a conceptual analogy for understanding basis functions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the necessity or clarity of using different indices in the summation. Some argue it is a standard practice for clarity, while others find it confusing and question its necessity.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding summation notation and its application in quantum mechanics, indicating potential gaps in foundational knowledge or differing interpretations of mathematical conventions.

betba
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
So I'm a little confused on the notation when working with wave functions constructed as a linear combination of an orthornormal basis set. Like on the form:

[itex]\Phi[/itex]=Ʃn cnψn

If I want to find the expectation value represented by the operator O for the state described by [itex]\Phi[/itex], I would calculate the inner product between [itex]\Phi[/itex] and O[itex]\Phi[/itex], like:

<[itex]\Phi[/itex]|O|[itex]\Phi[/itex]> = ∫dq [itex]\Phi[/itex]*(q)O[itex]\Phi[/itex](q) (assuming [itex]\Phi[/itex] is normalized so <[itex]\Phi[/itex]|[itex]\Phi[/itex]> = 1)

And now comes the question: When I insert the expanded wave function, why is 2 different indices used for the summations/basis functions:

<[itex]\Phi[/itex]|O|[itex]\Phi[/itex]> = ∫dq(Ʃn cnn*)O(Ʃm cmψm)

This is how the derivations look like in most textbooks, and I don't understand the difference between n and m. I would think the indices should be the same, as it is the same wave function, [itex]\Phi[/itex].

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That is not an issue of wave functions or quantum mechanics. That is simply algebra: how you expand the product of a sum. Observe:
[tex] (a+b+c)*(a+b+c) = a*(a+b+c) + b*(a+b+c) + c*(a+b+c) = a*a + a*b + a*c + b*a + b*b + ...[/tex]
That is exactly what you are doing in this case. Note that the result is not simply
[tex]a*b+b*b+c*c.[/tex]
 
But why use 2 different sums for the same wave function? [itex]\Phi[/itex] is equal to Ʃncnψn, not Ʃmcmψm. Or cleary it is, but then n = m?? Then why not just only use n in the first place?
 
betba said:
But why use 2 different sums for the same wave function? [itex]\Phi[/itex] is equal to Ʃncnψn, not Ʃmcmψm. Or cleary it is, but then n = m?? Then why not just only use n in the first place?

[itex]\Phi=\sum c_n \Psi_n[/itex] is the short form for [itex]\Phi=\Psi_1 + \Psi_2 + \Psi_3 + \ldots + \Psi_N[/itex]. Please think for a second about what happens when you insert this expression in two places into an expression like [itex]\Phi\cdot\Phi[/itex]. Play it through with an example with two terms if you must. Again, this has nothing at all to do with quantum mechanics or wave functions: This is elementary algebra, expanding the product of two sums!
 
Im not sure what your point is (maybe I am just very bone-headed). I know how to expand the product of 2 sums. Thats not the problem. The problem is inserting 2 different expressions for the same wave function. Like putting it your way:

[itex]\Phi[/itex] = [itex]\psi[/itex]1 + [itex]\psi[/itex]2 + [itex]\psi[/itex]3...[itex]\psi[/itex]n

When calculating the product [itex]\Phi[/itex]*[itex]\cdot[/itex][itex]\Phi[/itex] I insert the expression for [itex]\Phi[/itex]:

([itex]\psi[/itex]1 + [itex]\psi[/itex]2 + [itex]\psi[/itex]3...[itex]\psi[/itex]n)*[itex]\cdot[/itex]([itex]\psi[/itex]1 + [itex]\psi[/itex]2 + [itex]\psi[/itex]3...[itex]\psi[/itex]n) and get n2 terms. Here I clearly inserted the same expression for [itex]\Phi[/itex].
In all textbooks I've read so far, what is actually inserted is:

[itex]\Phi[/itex]*[itex]\cdot[/itex][itex]\Phi[/itex] = ([itex]\psi[/itex]1 + [itex]\psi[/itex]2 + [itex]\psi[/itex]3...[itex]\psi[/itex]n)*[itex]\cdot[/itex]([itex]\psi[/itex]1 + [itex]\psi[/itex]2 + [itex]\psi[/itex]3...[itex]\psi[/itex]m)

What does this m mean? Why don't they use n for both sums. Its the same wave function?

A link to a derivation of the variational method/principle http://vergil.chemistry.gatech.edu/notes/quantrev/node28.html

Here the indices i and j are used interchangeably, and I don't understand why.
 
I think that n and m are index of summation. If you have learned mathematics about Σ summation you should have known that these numbers mean sum over these numbers of terms.

In quantum mechanics, states are usually represented by these wave functions and bras and kets. Then these numbers are basically number of eigenkets or eigenfunctions that can form a complete set which is a basis. Basis are just like x y z in describing position. This is my personal view.
 
Basis in quantum mechanics are like tossing a quantum coin with eigenkets |head> and |tail>, which are sufficient to describe the whole system.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K