Graduate Ground state energy of a particle-in-a-box in coordinate scaling

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the ground state energy of a particle in an n-dimensional box and how it scales with coordinate transformations. The energy spectrum is established as inversely proportional to the square of the box's dimensions, applicable to various box shapes, including non-simply connected ones. It is suggested that for finite potential wells, the ground state energy decreases faster than the expected L^-2 scaling as the box size increases. The conversation also touches on the implications of finite well depth on energy scaling, hinting at potential exponential decay in energy levels. Overall, the exploration seeks to clarify the relationship between box dimensions, potential depth, and ground state energy behavior.
hilbert2
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,600
Reaction score
607
TL;DR
How does the ground state energy of one particle in n-dimensional box change in uniform coordinate scaling? What happens if the box has a finite depth in potential energy units?
The energy spectrum of a particle in 1D box is known to be

##E_n = \frac{h^2 n^2}{8mL^2}##,

with ##L## the width of the potential well. In 3D, the ground state energy of both cubic and spherical boxes is also proportional to the reciprocal square of the side length or diameter.

Does this apply for an n-dimensional box of any shape, including those that are not simply connected? And if the depth of the potential well is not infinite, does it approach some other scaling law in the limit of small well depth? The first of these claims should probably be true just because of the scaling property of the n-dimensional kinetic energy operator and Laplacian in a uniform coordinate scaling.

Edit: And, if there's a finite potential well of side length ##L##, depth ##V_0##, and ##d## is the approximate distance the particle in the ground state is able to sink inside the potential walls. will the ##E_0## be proportional to ##L^{-2}## if ##L## is made much larger than ##d##? I can solve this numerically myself but it would be interesting to see a source where it has been discussed before.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
hilbert2 said:
Summary:: How does the ground state energy of one particle in n-dimensional box change in uniform coordinate scaling? What happens if the box has a finite depth in potential energy units?

Does this apply for an n-dimensional box of any shape, including those that are not simply connected?

In 3D, for rectangle box
E_{n_x,n_y,n_z}=\frac{h^2}{8m}(\frac{n_x^2}{L_x^2}+\frac{n_y^2}{L_y^2}+\frac{n_z^2}{L_z^2})
 
Yes. that's the spectrum of a 3D parallelepiped potential well, but I was thinking about one of any shape, like elliptical or half-sphere.

Edit: Solving numerically the ground states of several potential wells of same finite but large depth ##V_0##, it seems that the ##E_0## decreases faster than ##L^{-2}## (possibly exponentially) when ##L\rightarrow\infty##.
 
Last edited:
hilbert2 said:
Summary:: How does the ground state energy of one particle in n-dimensional box change in uniform coordinate scaling? What happens if the box has a finite depth in potential energy units?

And if the depth of the potential well is not infinite, does it approach some other scaling law in the limit of small well depth?
For 1D well potential Shrodinger equation is written as
\frac{d^2\psi}{dx^2}+(\epsilon-v)\psi=0
where x,##\epsilon##, v are dimensionless parameters, x=X/L, L is width of the well, and ##\epsilon##=E/e, v=V/e
e=\frac{\hbar^2 }{2mL^2}
So limit to infinite well is in exact mathematical sense
\frac{\hbar^2 }{2mL^2V}\rightarrow +0
Wide well or heavy mass does similar effect.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes hilbert2
Thanks. I'll have to calculate the ##E_0## of several potential wells of same finite depth ##V_0## but different ##L##. Then I'll plot the ##E_0 (L)## function in log-log coordinates to see how small ##V_0## can be without the result deviating from ##L^{-2}## behavior. Any power law graph looks like a straight line when drawn in double logarithmic coordinates, so that's a way to find out if ##E_0 (L)## decreases exponentially and not like ##L^{-a}## with ##a>0## for some value of ##V_0##.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 153 ·
6
Replies
153
Views
16K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 113 ·
4
Replies
113
Views
13K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K