Fourier's Trick and calculation of Cn

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Fourier analysis in calculating coefficients in the context of the time-independent Schrödinger equation, particularly focusing on the use of Fourier's trick and the properties of the Kronecker delta in relation to wavefunctions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses understanding of the completeness of wavefunctions but seeks clarification on how Fourier's trick aids in calculating coefficients ##c_n##.
  • Another participant emphasizes that Fourier analysis is more than just a 'trick' and suggests consulting textbooks for deeper understanding.
  • A participant questions the reasoning behind the equation ##\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}c_n\delta_{mn} = c_m##, noting that the Kronecker delta simplifies the sum to yield ##c_m## when ##m = n##.
  • Further clarification is sought on why only ##c_m## is obtained from the summation, with a misunderstanding about the coefficients associated with wavefunctions being addressed.
  • A participant draws an analogy between the operation of the Kronecker delta and the dot product in vector mathematics to illustrate the concept of extracting specific coefficients.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the properties of the Kronecker delta and its role in simplifying the summation, but there is some disagreement regarding the terminology of Fourier's trick and the clarity of its application in this context. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best way to conceptualize these ideas.

Contextual Notes

There is an acknowledgment of varying interpretations of Fourier analysis and its terminology, as well as a potential lack of clarity in the original material referenced by participants.

I_laff
Messages
41
Reaction score
2
I understand that the solutions to the time-independent Schrödinger equation are complete, so a linear combination of the wavefunctions can describe any function (i.e. ##f(x) = \sum_{n = 1}^{\infty}c_n\psi_n(x) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{a}} \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} c_n\sin\left(\frac{n\pi}{a}x\right)## for the infinite well case).

I don't understand how using Fourier's trick allows you to calculate ##c_n##. Also, I don't understand how ##\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}c_n\delta_{mn} = c_m##. I get that the Kronecker delta comes out of the fact that ##\psi_m^\ast(x)## and ##\psi_n(x)## are orthogonal. I understand that when ##m = n##, then the Kronecker delta equals 1, but how does this allow us to find ##c_m## and ##c_n## .
$$ \int_{0}^{a} \psi_m^\ast(x) f(x)\mathrm dx = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}c_n \int_{0}^{a} \psi_m^\ast (x)\psi_n(x)\mathrm dx = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}c_n\delta_{mn} = c_m $$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I_laff said:
I don't understand how using Fourier's trick allows you to calculate ##c_n##.
Read up on Fourier transforms in any textbook of your liking.

Also, I don't understand how ##\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}c_n\delta_{mn} = c_m##
That's because ##\delta=0## unless m = n; then it's 1. :rolleyes:

Fourier analysis is a bit more than just a 'trick' :mad:
 
BvU said:
Fourier analysis is a bit more than just a 'trick'

I referred to it as a trick because that's what the material I was reading referred to it as. I'll take a look into Fourier transforms then.
 
I_laff said:
I referred to it as a trick because that's what the material I was reading referred to it as. I'll take a look into Fourier transforms then.
What was that material? You'll generally get better answers if you identify your sources - chances are that someone here is already familiar with it.

(I remember that exact phrase "Fourier's trick" appearing in a thread here a while back)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU
It was from Griffiths, Introduction to quantum mechanics second edition chapter 2
 
Found it on p 28. (and you are not responsible for his wording :smile:)
Now I'm puzzled about your question: you reproduce the line that works out ##c_m##, so that should answer it !?

(##c_n## does not come out, though! n is just a summation variable)
 
I understand the properties of the Kronecker delta, what I didn't understand was why ##c_m## came out. So, let me get this right. When applying the Kronecker delta to ##\sum_{n = 1}^{\infty} c_n##, you will get a coefficient value that both ##\psi_n## and ##\psi_m## share (due to the properties of ##\delta_{mn}##)?

What I misunderstood previously, was that I thought ##\psi_m## consisted of multiple coefficients, and so ##\delta_{mn}## when applied would work out the mutual coefficients between ##\psi_n## and ##\psi_m##, however only one coefficient (##c_m##) was stated.
 
Think of it like a dot product. If I have a 3D vector \overrightarrow{V} = V_x \overrightarrow{e_x} + V_y \overrightarrow{e_y} + V_z \overrightarrow{e_z}, and I take the dot product with a unit vector, I get \overrightarrow{V} \centerdot \overrightarrow{e_x} = V_x. this is because the unit vectors are orthogonal, so the dot product "picks off" the component along the x-axis. It's exactly the same in Fourier analysis, even though there are an infinite number of "unit vectors".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: plasmakt, Nugatory and I_laff
Ah, that's a nice way to think about it :ok:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K