Free Particle in Quantum Mechanics Explained

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sciboudy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Free particle Particle
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of a free particle in quantum mechanics, particularly focusing on the implications of a zero potential. Participants explore various aspects of the topic, including mathematical representations, normalization of wave functions, and the nature of energy and momentum in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the mathematical transformation of the wave function and the significance of the wave vector (k) in the context of normalization.
  • There are discussions on the representation of wave functions in both spatial and wave vector domains, with references to Fourier transformations.
  • Some participants express confusion regarding the concept of energy not being quantized for a free particle, with references to solving the Schrödinger equation without boundary conditions.
  • One participant suggests that a free particle cannot exist in an energy-momentum eigenstate due to normalization issues, leading to the necessity of a linear superposition of eigenstates.
  • There are differing opinions on the existence of a free particle, with some arguing that it is merely an approximation and does not exist in reality.
  • A participant raises a question about the discreteness of momentum and whether there are models that propose momentum as a discrete observable.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express both agreement and disagreement regarding the existence of a free particle, with some asserting it does not exist while others support the idea that it is an approximation. The discussion remains unresolved on several technical aspects, including the normalization of wave functions and the implications of energy and momentum representations.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various quantum mechanics textbooks, indicating that the topic is complex and may depend on specific definitions and interpretations. The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the nature of free particles.

sciboudy
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
could anyone explain the free particle in Quantum mechanics?
when the potential is zero
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This subject occupies an entire chapter (or even more) in most quantum mechanics textbooks. I suggest that you ask specific questions.
 
okay I'm using grifth

in the page 45 he transform the forlmla of ψ as function of x "or he intgrate to X "

but the solution was no normalize so he transform it to κ and intfrate to κ dκ how?

and what k represent ?
 
sciboudy said:
and what k represent ?

Wave vector.
 
okay why we transform to it ??
 
Read it, it’s in Griffiths book. You cannot normalize wave function of a free particle unless you do transform to integral over the continuous variable, which is k.
 
Psi^2 said:
Read it, it’s in Griffiths book. You cannot normalize wave function of a free particle unless you do transform to integral over the continuous variable, which is k.

why he choose to ingrate to K ? specially ?? how did he transform it to K ?
 
i want understand how is we find it's equation and describe it's change in the wave packet
 
The wave function can be represented many ways. One of these ways is over the spatial domain, but it can be also represented over the wave vector domain also known as momentum representation. Both representations are related via Fourier transformation.
Wave vector and momenta are related: p = k * h. In the wave vector domain you can get the probability that the particle have certain momenta via Copenhagen interpretation P(k)=|ψ(k)|^2. Any way this is a matter explained on any quantum mechanics textbook.


Sergio
 
  • #10
SergioPL said:
The wave function can be represented many ways. One of these ways is over the spatial domain, but it can be also represented over the wave vector domain also known as momentum representation. Both representations are related via Fourier transformation.
Wave vector and momenta are related: p = k * h. In the wave vector domain you can get the probability that the particle have certain momenta via Copenhagen interpretation P(k)=|ψ(k)|^2. Any way this is a matter explained on any quantum mechanics textbook.


Sergio

thank you very much you made it easy :D
i got it
but i want to know how is the probability denisty of finding particle in the wave function increase ?
 
  • #11
and what you mean by Energy is not quantized for a free particle. and how you got this ?
 
  • #12
sciboudy said:
and what you mean by Energy is not quantized for a free particle. and how you got this ?

You simply solve Schrödinger equation for free particle, and look at the result. No boundary conditions, no quantization ;)
 
  • #13
The basic idea is that if you have a free particle, it cannot exist in a energy-momentum eigenstate because those eigenstates are un-normalizable. Additionally, experimentally speaking, knowing the momentum of this particle perfectly well means not knowing the position of this particle at all, which means you can't really measure this particle since you don't know where to measure.

Therefore, the particle must exist in some linear superposition of eigenstates. Because the eigenstates are a complete set of states, one can always do this, just like for any other problem.

The difference in this situation from the situation in e.g. the particle in a box, is that the energy-momentum eigenstates are a continuum of states rather than discrete states. Therefore, a linear superposition is an integral and not a sum over states. Specifically, this integral is a Fourier integral because the eigenstates are the Fourier factor e^ikx.
 
  • #14
Hi there, related to this topic, a free particle spin is something that can take a discrete range of values, as it happens with electromagnetic o colour charge. However the other important observable, impulse, can take a continum range of values. This seems suspicious to me since nature seems to be formed by a finite (inmense, but finite) number of mathematical objects. Isnt out there any model or research where it is supposed that impulse is also a discrete observable? perhaps lattice quantum mechanics or something like that?

Thanks!
 
  • #15
sciboudy said:
could anyone explain the free particle in Quantum mechanics?
when the potential is zero

I think it does not exist.
 
  • #16
zhangyang said:
I think it does not exist.

I agree.
 
  • #17
Psi^2 said:
I agree.
why you agree
 
  • #18
sciboudy said:
why you agree

Because it is approximation. In realty, there is no such a thing as a free particle.
 
  • #19
the_pulp said:
Hi there, related to this topic, a free particle spin is something that can take a discrete range of values, as it happens with electromagnetic o colour charge. However the other important observable, impulse, can take a continum range of values. This seems suspicious to me since nature seems to be formed by a finite (inmense, but finite) number of mathematical objects. Isnt out there any model or research where it is supposed that impulse is also a discrete observable? perhaps lattice quantum mechanics or something like that?

Thanks!

Hello! That's a very interesting matter, but I don't know of any physical model that works on discrete time, space, momentum and energy. As is well known, these variables cannot be perfectly measured by the indeterminacy principia, but they move on the continuum of real numbers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
503
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K