How can I solve the Linear Harmonic Oscillator in polar coordinates?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the Linear Harmonic Oscillator (LHO) in polar coordinates, exploring different methods and approaches to tackle the problem. Participants share their thoughts on the appropriateness of using polar coordinates versus Cartesian coordinates, as well as the mathematical techniques involved in the solution process.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in solving the LHO in polar coordinates and describes their approach of separating variables using the Fourier method.
  • Another participant suggests that solving the problem in Cartesian coordinates is simpler and outlines a method involving the multiplication of solutions for one-dimensional oscillators and the addition of energy levels.
  • A third participant provides a detailed derivation of the radial wavefunction and energy eigenvalues for the LHO in polar coordinates, including the transformation of variables and normalization conditions.
  • The original poster clarifies their motivation for using polar coordinates, stating a desire to practice solving problems in multiple ways despite the potential complexity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to solving the LHO, with some advocating for Cartesian coordinates while others support the use of polar coordinates. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the advantages and disadvantages of each method.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the complexity of the mathematical steps involved in the polar coordinate approach, and there are references to normalization conditions and transformations that may depend on specific definitions or assumptions not fully explored in the discussion.

Nemanja989
Messages
78
Reaction score
2
Hello there,

Can anyone help me, I am struggling with solving LHO in two dimension,but in the polar coordinates.
I transfer laplacian into polar from decart coordinates, write Ψ=ΦR, and do Fourier separation method for solving differential equation. But I do not know how to solve differential equation on R.

I will write to where I came tomorrow, or in a few hours.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why trouble yourself by going into polar co-ordinates? Just look for solution of the form Ψ = X(x)Y(y), for the Schrödinger equation in cartesian co-ordinates and you'll get two equations for a Linear Harmonic Oscillator. Surely, for the case of two one dimensional equation, you know the solution, multiply them, and add there energy levels to get the answer. I think the lowest energy state would have the energy of (hbar)*w, where w is the natural frequency of oscillation and the wavefunction is a Gaussian in radial co-ordinate r.
 
In this problem, both [itex]\phi[/itex] and [itex]z[/itex] are cyclic coordinates (they do not enter explicitly in the Schroedinger equation), so the corresponding conjugate momenta [itex]p_{\phi} \equiv l_{z}[/itex] and [itex]p_{z}[/itex] commute with the Hamiltonian. Therefore, the stationary states of the system are of the form:

[tex] \psi_{m, p_{z}}(\rho, \phi, z) = \frac{1}{(2 \pi \hbar)^{1/2}} \, e^{\frac{i}{\hbar} \, p_{z} \, z} \, \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \, \pi}} \, e^{i \, m \, \phi} \, R_{m}(\rho), \ m = \ldots, -1, 0, 1, \ldots[/tex]

Substitute this into the Schroedinger equation and you will get the following oridnary differential equation:

[tex] -\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2 \, \mu} \, \left[ \frac{1}{\rho} \, \frac{d}{d \rho}\left(\rho \, \frac{dR_{m}(\rho)}{d \rho}\right) - \frac{m^{2}}{\rho^{2}} \, R_{m}(\rho) - \frac{p^{2}_{z}}{\hbar^{2}} \, R_{m}(\rho) \right] + \frac{\mu \, \omega^{2} \, \rho^{2}}{2} \, R_{m}(\rho) = E \, R_{m}(\rho)[/tex]

The normalization condition is:

[tex] \int_{0}^{\infy}{\rho \, R^{2}_{m}(\rho) \, d\rho} = 1[/tex]

Introduce a dimensionless argument:

[tex] \rho = a x, R_{m}(\rho) = \frac{1}{a} \, y_{m}(x)[/tex]

with:

[tex] a = \left(\frac{\hbar}{\mu \, \omega}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}[/tex]

and:

[tex] \epsilon = \frac{2}{\hbar \, \omega} \, \left( E - \frac{p^{2}_{z}}{2 \, \mu} \right)[/tex]

you will get the following equation:

[tex] y''_{m} + \frac{1}{x} \, y'_{m}(x) + \left(\epsilon - x^{2} - \frac{m^{2}}{x^{2}}\right) \, y_{m}(x) = 0[/tex]

with the normalization condition:

[tex] \int_{0}^{\infty}{x \, y^{2}_{m}(x) \, dx} = 1[/tex]

Usually, we want to get rid of the first derivative in the differential equation. We can achieve this by the substitution:

[tex] y_{m}(x) = \frac{z_{m}(x)}{\sqrt{x}}[/tex]

A direct substitution should convince you that the equation satisfied by [itex]z_{m}(x)[/itex] is:

[tex] z''_{m} + \left(\epsilon - x^{2} - \frac{m^{2} - 1/4}{x^{2}}\right) \, z_{m} = 0[/tex]

and the normalization condition reads:

[tex] \int_{0}^{\infty}{z^{2}_{m}(x) \, dx} = 1[/tex]

The asymptotic behavior for [itex]z_{m}(x)[/itex] for both large and small values of [itex]x[/itex] is obtained by keeping the dominant terms in the equation for the relevant region:

[tex] z''_{m 0} - \frac{m^{2} - 1/4}{x^{2}} \, z_{m 0} = 0, \ x \rightarrow 0[/tex]

This is an Euler equation and has solutions of the form [itex]z_{m 0} \tilde x^{k}[/itex]. Substituting, we get an algebraic equation for [itex]k[/itex]:

[tex] k^{2} - k - \left(m^{2} - \frac{1}{4}\right) = 0[/tex]

the solutions of which are:

[tex] k_{1/2} = \frac{1 \pm 2 \, |m|}{2}[/tex]

We take:

[tex] z_{m 0} \sim x^{|m| + \frac{1}{2}}, \ x \rightarrow 0[/tex]

For large x, we have:

[tex] z''_{m \infty} - x^{2} \, z_{m \infty} = 0[/tex]

which is of the same form as in the one dimensional case, so we have:

[tex] z_{m \infty} \sim e^{-\frac{x^{2}}{2}}, \ x \rightarrow \infty[/tex]

Finally, we capture the asymptotic behavior by writing:

[tex] z_{m}(x) = x^{|m| + 1/2} \, e^{-x^{2}/2} \, v_{m}(x)[/tex]

After some differentiation and algebraic manipulation, you should get the following equation for [itex]v_{m}(x)[/itex]:

[tex] v''_{m} + \left(\frac{2 |m| + 1}{x} - 2 x \right) \, v'_{m} + \lambda \, v_{m} = 0[/tex]

where

[tex] \lambda = \epsilon - 2 |m| - 1[/tex]

Using a change of variables in the argument:

[tex] x = a \, t^{\alpha}[/tex]

you will get:

[tex] t \, \ddot{v}_{m} + \left[ 1 + 2 \, \alpha \, |m| - 2 a^{2} \, \alpha \, t^{2 \, \alpha} \right] \, \dot{v}_{m} + \lambda \, (a \alpha)^{2} t^{2 \, \alpha - 1} = 0[/tex]

Compare this with the differential equation for the Kummer confluent hypergeometric equation [itex]_{1}F_{1}(a; c; t)[/itex]:

[tex] t \ddot{y} + (c - t) \, \dot{y} - a \, y = 0[/tex]

we see that we should have:

[tex] 2 \, \alpha = 1, \; 2 \, \alpha \, a^{2} = 1 \Rightarrow \alpha = \frac{1}{2}, \; a = 1 \Rightarrow x = t^{\frac{1}{2}} \Leftrightarrow t = x^{2}[/tex]

So, we can write:

[tex] v_{m}(x) = _{1}F_{1}(-\frac{\lambda}{4}, |m| + 1, x^{2})[/tex]

Collecting everything back, the radial wavefunction is:

[tex] R_{n m}(a \, x) = C_{n, m} \, x^{|m|} \, e^{-\frac{x^{2}}{2}} \, _{1}F_{1}\left( -n, |m| + 1, x^{2} \right), n \in \mathbb{N}_{0}, m \in \mathbb{Z}[/tex]

where [itex]C_{n, m}[/itex] is a normalization constant. The energy eigenvalues associated with motion in the plane of the oscillator are:

[tex] E_{n, m, p_{z}} - \frac{p^{2}_{z}}{2 \, \mu} = E'_{n, m} = \hbar \, \omega \, \left( |m| + 2 \, n + \frac{1}{2} \right)[/tex]
 
I have attached a pdf file into this post.

Thank you for responding!

You asked me why I do it in polar coordinates, when it`s much easier in decarte. Well I simply want to practice on my own, I want to solve one problem in a few ways. I have just finished basic cousre of quantum mechanics, but we haven`t done LHO in polar coordinates.
 

Attachments

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K