Find the wave function of a Gaussian wave packet

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the wave function of a Gaussian wave packet, specifically focusing on the application of formulas related to wave functions and Fourier transforms in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of a Gaussian integral and its validity when dealing with imaginary numbers. There is also a focus on the interpretation of variables in the wave function and the Fourier transform.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with each other's reasoning, questioning assumptions about the variables used in the equations, and suggesting clarifications regarding the definitions of the Fourier transform. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of different variable names to avoid confusion.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of potential confusion arising from the use of the same variable for different purposes in the equations, which may impact the clarity of the discussion.

serverxeon
Messages
100
Reaction score
0
fxxo3d.png


In particular, i am solving part b.
I pulled off a couple of formulas from a textbook, but I'm quite sure they are incorrect to apply here.
Can anyone guide me?

Below is my attempt.

2rypn9k.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm pretty sure that you are fine up to the line
\psi(x,t)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \cdot \frac{\sqrt{\sigma}}{\pi^{1/4}} \int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i\hbar tk^2/2m+ixk} dk
But then after that you apply the 'general form' of the Gaussian integral. But this 'general form' is only true when alpha, beta and gamma are real numbers. But in this case, they are imaginary numbers (well, gamma is zero, but the others are imaginary).
 
huh, hold on. that 'general form' should work for imaginary numbers too. So I would agree with your answer. (except in the last line I think you have not written the square root around all the things that you are meant to put it around). The answer seems really strange though. I would not expect that at all...
 
I would be very surprised if the k in your initial wavefunction is related to momentum. How would you interpret this? I think it is some fixed constant, which changes every calculation afterwards.
 
yep, that's where the problem is, I think. You should define the Fourier transform as something like ##\phi(k')## i.e. use a different variable to the ##k## that is in the equation for ##\psi(x,t)##. Since you generally want ##k## and ##k'## to be two different variables.

edit: or you can just re-name the ##k## in the equation for ##\psi(x,t)## as some other letter, ##\kappa## (kappa) for example. And then use ##\phi(k)## as your Fourier transform. This will save you from having to write out the prime a lot of times, which can be annoying. But go with whichever way you prefer. Main thing to remember is that they are different variables. I'm guessing you know this, but just forgot (as I did to begin with).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K