How do I plot this probability density over time?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges of plotting a probability density function derived from a wave function in quantum mechanics, particularly focusing on the time evolution of non-eigenstate wave functions. Participants explore the implications of wave function normalization and the role of energy eigenstates in determining the time-dependent behavior of the wave function.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how to plot the probability density over time, noting that the exponential factor in the wave function seems to cancel when squared, leading to uncertainty about the time dependence.
  • Another participant asserts that the wave function is not an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, indicating that it must evolve in time and suggesting the need to project it onto energy eigenstates to find ##\psi(x,t)##.
  • A question is raised about how to determine if a wave function is an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, with a proposed method involving the computation of ##\hat{H} \psi##.
  • Concerns are expressed regarding the cancellation of the exponential factor in the context of normalization, with a participant questioning how it affects the integral of the squared modulus of the wave function.
  • It is noted that the time-dependent wave function will be a linear combination of energy eigenstates, leading to cross-terms in the probability density that do not cancel out.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of the wave function's properties, with ongoing questions about the nature of eigenstates and the effects of time evolution remaining unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions of pure and mixed states, as well as the implications of wave function normalization and time evolution in quantum mechanics.

baouba
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Here's the question: http://imgur.com/N60qRmw

I normalized the wave function and got A = sqrt(315/8L^9)

but how would I plot representative snapshots if the exponential factor will cancel when I square it? It's not a mixed state so it shouldn't depend on time as far as I can tell. Should I use a Fourier series? I'm just at a loss as to how to plot different instances in time if the complex term should cancel out when taking the square modulus. I feel like I might not have a complete understanding of the wave function or pure/mixed states. Could someone help clear this up?

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That wavefunction is not an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, so it must evolve in time. You will need to project that wavefunction onto the wavefunctions for the energy eigenstates to determine an expression for ##\psi(x,t)##.
 
fzero said:
That wavefunction is not an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, so it must evolve in time. You will need to project that wavefunction onto the wavefunctions for the energy eigenstates to determine an expression for ##\psi(x,t)##.

How can you tell if a given wave function isn't an eigenstate of the hamiltonian? I just don't get how if |Ψn(x, y)|^2 = |Anψn(x)e^-iEnt/h-bar|^22 and Ψ is a pure state, how doesn't the exponential factor cancel out in 1 = ∫ |Ψn(x, y)|2 dx ?
 
baouba said:
How can you tell if a given wave function isn't an eigenstate of the hamiltonian?

The most direct way would be to just compute ##\hat{H} \psi##. If the result is not ##\lambda \psi##, where ##\lambda## is a constant, then ##\psi## is not an eigenfunction of the Hamiltonian.

I just don't get how if |Ψn(x, y)|^2 = |Anψn(x)e^-iEnt/h-bar|^22 and Ψ is a pure state, how doesn't the exponential factor cancel out in 1 = ∫ |Ψn(x, y)|2 dx ?

The time-dependent wavefunction ##\psi(x,t)## will be a linear combination of the energy eigenstates. When you compute ##|\psi(x,t)|^2##, you will find cross-terms where the exponents do not cancel.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K