Finite quantum well, factor of 2*pi seems necessary but why?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on solving for the allowed energy values E of a finite square quantum well with a depth of U0 = 25 eV and a width of 0.5 nm, containing an electron of mass m = 9.11 x 10^-31 kg. The time-independent Schrödinger equation (TISE) is utilized, leading to a numerical estimation of E values that initially did not align with expected results. The introduction of a factor of 2π in the mass adjustment (m' = 6.28m) successfully reconciled the calculated energy values with the expected results, revealing the importance of using the correct reduced Planck constant (\hbar) and understanding the implications of mass variations on quantum calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the time-independent Schrödinger equation (TISE)
  • Familiarity with quantum mechanics concepts, specifically finite square wells
  • Knowledge of the reduced Planck constant (\hbar) and its significance in quantum calculations
  • Basic numerical methods for solving equations, including the use of spreadsheets
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn about the implications of mass variations in quantum systems
  • Study the relationship between the reduced Planck constant (\hbar) and the Planck constant (h)
  • Explore numerical methods for solving the Schrödinger equation in various potential wells
  • Investigate the physical significance of energy quantization in quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in quantum mechanics, physicists working with quantum wells, and anyone interested in the mathematical modeling of quantum systems.

Villhelm
Messages
36
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Solve for the allowed energy values E of a finite square quantum well of depth U0 = 25eV, width a = 0.5nm that contains an electron of mass m (I'm presuming that m = 9.11*10^-31kg, the question doesn't indicate a specific value to use).

I'm defining the interior potential to be 0eV (so that the walls are +25eV).
I'm also defining the well as extending over x = [0,a]

Homework Equations


Time-independent Schrödinger equation in 1 dimension + some basic DE stuff.

The Attempt at a Solution


Starting from the TISE, I end up with the following:

2 * sqrt(E*U0 - E^2) / (2E - U0)
= tan(sqrt(2*m*E)*a/hbar)

Upto there I'd (apparently) done things correctly. However, when I estimated the value(s) of E which satisfy the equation numerically I did not get the results that were expected. I did the estimation using openoffice spreadsheet. The tan function is using radians.

My first thought was to see if my value assumed for the electron mass was wrong, so I tried multiples in the range m' = [0.5m,2m] just to see what happened to the results and noticed that the higher the value of m', the closer the values of E that solved the equation came to those I was indicated to have gotten. I tried m'=10m and found that it pushes the values of E too far, so I started iterating through some values until I ended up settling down to m'=6.28m which struck me as being 2*pi*m.

The RHS of the equation now looks like:

RHS = tan(sqrt(2*(2*pi)*m*E)*a/hbar)

and results in a reproduction of the given energy values (there are five, approximately at {1.123, 4.461, 9.905, 17.162, 24.782}eV).

I don't understand why this works, however, especially when the 2*pi is inside the square root.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Using your original equations, I found five solutions close to the ones you listed.

What value are you using for \hbar? The factor of 2π could arise if you're using h instead of \hbar.

Here's a little trick you can use to make evaluating the argument of the tangent a bit easier:

\frac{\sqrt{2mE}}{\hbar}a = \frac{\sqrt{2(mc^2)E}}{\hbar c}a

where c is the speed of light. The mass of the electron is 511000 eV/c2, and the combination \hbar c is equal to 197 eV nm (this is a useful combination to know). If you measure E in eV and a in nm, all the units cancel as you need them to.
 
Last edited:
vela said:
What value are you using for \hbar? The factor of 2π could arise if you're using h instead of \hbar.


I've been using the value \hbar = 6.58 * 10-16 eV.s
Also, for m I was using 9.11 * 10-31kg

I did wonder if maybe I'd messed up with \hbar vs h, but with the 2π inside the square root rather than outside along with \hbar or h made me question that.

I'll use the constant values you've cited and see what I get.

Things seem to work out nicely! Thanks very much.

Incidentally I've just learned a very good lesson from this - I was making assumptions that the values I obtained from the fudge I described above were within reasonable error margins of the values I was given as correct - however I failed to notice that the values were infact _not_ consistent with calculation error because I'd been doing a simple linear interpolation of the value of E which was the root, which was reasonably accurate for the lower E values given the number of digits I was calculating with, but it actually diverged for the higher ones and I hadn't bothered to check more than a glance and just assumed they worked out (why wouldn't they, a factor of 2*pi just _couldn't_ be a coincidence, right?) ...:redface:
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K