Finding the momentum-space wave function for the infinite square well

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding the momentum-space wave function for the nth stationary state of the infinite square well. The position-space wave function is given by \(\Psi_n(x,t) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{a}} \sin\left(\frac{n\pi}{a}x\right)e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}\). The momentum operator in position space is defined as \(\hat{p} = -i\hbar\frac{d}{dx}\). Two methods for deriving the momentum-space wave function \(\Phi_n(p,t)\) yield different results, leading to confusion regarding the validity of the outcomes. The first method indicates certainty in measuring specific momentum values \(p = \pm n\pi\hbar/a\), while the second suggests non-zero probabilities for other momentum values.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, specifically wave functions.
  • Familiarity with the infinite square well model.
  • Knowledge of momentum operators and eigenfunctions in quantum mechanics.
  • Proficiency in mathematical techniques for integrating wave functions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of momentum-space wave functions in quantum mechanics.
  • Learn about the properties of eigenfunctions in the context of quantum systems.
  • Explore the implications of wave function normalization in quantum mechanics.
  • Investigate the differences between position-space and momentum-space representations of wave functions.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in quantum mechanics, particularly those studying wave functions and the infinite square well model. This discussion is beneficial for anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of momentum-space wave functions and their derivations.

epsilonjon
Messages
57
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Find the momentum-space wave function for the nth stationary state of the infinite square well.

Homework Equations



Nth state position-space wavefunction:

[itex]\Psi_n(x,t) = \sqrt(\frac{2}{a})sin(\frac{n\pi}{a}x)e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}[/itex].

Momentum operator in position space:

[itex]\hat{p} = -i\hbar\frac{d}{dx}[/itex].

The Attempt at a Solution



As a result of an earlier question I know that you can write

[itex]\Psi_n(x,t) = \sqrt(\frac{2}{a})sin(\frac{n\pi}{a}x)e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}[/itex]
[itex]= \sqrt(\frac{2}{a})[\frac{e^{i n\pi x/a}-e^{-i n\pi x/a}}{2i}]e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}[/itex]
[itex]= \frac{-i}{\sqrt(2a)}[\sqrt(a)f_{n\pi\hbar/a}(x) - \sqrt(a)f_{-n\pi\hbar/a}(x)]e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}[/itex]
[itex]= \frac{-i}{\sqrt(2)}[f_{n\pi\hbar/a}(x) - f_{-n\pi\hbar/a}(x)]e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}[/itex](*)

where [itex]f_{p}(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt(a)}e^{ipx/\hbar}[/itex] are the momentum eigenfunctions (when we're in position space) normalized over 0≤x≤a.

Now when you write [itex]\Psi_n(x,t)[/itex] as a sum (or integral) of momentum eigenfunctions then [itex]\Phi_n(p,t)[/itex] is the coefficient of these eigenfunctions right? So combining this with (*) do we not get that

[itex]\Phi(p,t) = \frac{-i}{\sqrt(2)}e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}[/itex] when [itex]p=n\pi\hbar/a[/itex];
[itex]\Phi(p,t) = \frac{i}{\sqrt(2)}e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}[/itex] when [itex]p=-n\pi\hbar/a[/itex];
[itex]\Phi(p,t) = 0[/itex] otherwise .

And note that the sum of the squares of these adds up to 1, as it should.

But now if I just did it without thinking so much, and did

[itex]\Phi_n(p,t) = \frac{1}{\sqrt(2\pi\hbar)}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}\Psi_n(x,t)e^{-ipx/\hbar}dx[/itex]

then I get the result

[itex]\Phi_n(p,t) = \frac{\sqrt(a\pi)}{\sqrt(\hbar)}\frac{ne^{-iE_nt/\hbar}}{(n\pi)^2 - (ap/\hbar)^2}[1-(-1)^ne^{-ipa/\hbar}][/itex].

Now this function does peak at those "special" momentum values [itex]p=\pm n\pi\hbar/a[/itex], but it is non-zero for the other values.

So how come the two methods do not match up? The first says that I am certain to measure one of the two momentum values [itex]p=\pm n\pi\hbar/a[/itex], but the second says I can also get others. Which is correct?

Thanks for any help! :smile:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's because the ##\psi(x) = 0## outside the well, but the linear combination of fpn(x) and f-pn(x) doesn't vanish. In other words, you can't express the spatial wave function as a linear combination of just the two f's.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K