Free Particle 1D: Box Normalization Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter cscott
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Box Normalization
cscott
Messages
778
Reaction score
1
Question

Free particle in 1D where V(x) = 0. There is a general boundary condition \psi(x+L)=e^{i\theta}\psi(x) used for box normalization which has arbitrary phase theta. E=k^2\hbar/(2m) is true for free particle energies.

Attempt

Comparing with the condition \psi(x+L)=\psi(x) I don't see how I will get different energies E since L is still the maximum wavelength, therefore \lambda = L/n = 2\pi/k or k = 2n\pi/L for n = 1, 2, ...; and then energies E_n can be computed.

How do I get theta dependence into the energies for the case \psi(x+L)=e^{i\theta}\psi(x)? Or maybe the better question is do I need theta dependence in the energies for a correct solution? Shouldn't the phase of a wave function have no physical significance?

Given the k above is true then my normalized eigenfunctions would be \psi_n(x) = L^{-1/2} \exp(i(2\pi n/L)x+i\theta)? ...But I'm not sure that k is correct.

Can anyone clear this up for me? Much thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The phase is arbitrary, but that does not mean that you can set it to zero when applying the boundary condition.

It may help to consider the physical meaning of the boundary condition above, which occurs when you have translational symmetry in crystal lattices (Bloch waves).

http://www.iue.tuwien.ac.at/phd/smirnov/node41.html
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top