How Does an Electron Behave in a One-Sided Infinite Potential Well?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves an electron trapped in a one-dimensional potential well with a boundary condition at R0, where the potential is infinite beyond this point. The original poster attempts to analyze the wavefunction and boundary conditions to find the expected position of the electron in its lowest energy state.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of boundary conditions to the wavefunction and the implications of having only one boundary. There are attempts to solve for coefficients in the wavefunction and to normalize it, raising questions about the integration limits and the nature of the potential well.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on manipulating the wavefunction and applying boundary conditions. There is ongoing exploration of the implications of the one-sided potential well, with some questioning the validity of the problem setup and suggesting that it may not align with standard quantum mechanics principles.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of potential misunderstandings regarding the nature of the potential well, particularly concerning the boundary conditions and the existence of a lowest energy state. The original poster hints at possible errors in the problem statement itself, suggesting a need for clarification on the intended setup.

DevonV
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


An electron is trapped in a 1D potential described by:

V(x) = 0 if x < R0
V(x) = infinity if x > R0

Electron is in lowest energy state, and experiment shows that:
(\Delta)x = sqrt(<x2> - <x>2) = 0.181 x 10-10

Show that <x> = 0.5R0


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I started by treating it like an infinite well, with:
(\psi)(x) = Asin(kx) + Bcos(kx)

and applying the boundary conditions as usual, however in this case there is only one (at R0):

(\psi)(R0) = Asin(kR0) + Bcos(kR0) = 0

Normally the BC at x = 0 eliminates the Bcos(kx), but that doesn't exist in this case.

Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!

(PS. sorry for bad formatting, latex was being extremely uncooperative)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
DevonV said:
Normally the BC at x = 0 eliminates the Bcos(kx), but that doesn't exist in this case.

You can use your boundary condition to solve for B. Then you can rescale A and use a trig identity to simplify the wavefunction.
 
Thanks for the reply!

I solved for B, yielding -Atan(kRo), and subbing that back into the BC equation gave me the condition:

Asin(kR0) -Atan(kR0) = 0

which i think is only true for:

k = n(\pi)R0

However in order to normalize this and find A, I need to integrate from -infinity to R0 right? Which isn't going to work out well for a trig function, so I must have done something wrong.

Anyone give me another nudge in the right direction?

Thanks!
 
DevonV said:
Thanks for the reply!

I solved for B, yielding -Atan(kRo), and subbing that back into the BC equation gave me the condition:

Asin(kR0) -Atan(kR0) = 0

which i think is only true for:

k = n(\pi)R0

If you substitute back into the boundary condition, you should find

Asin(kR0) -Atan(kR0) cos(kR0) =0

which is automatically true, since you're just going in circles.

However in order to normalize this and find A, I need to integrate from -infinity to R0 right? Which isn't going to work out well for a trig function, so I must have done something wrong.

Anyone give me another nudge in the right direction?

Thanks!

Are you sure it's just a one-sided barrier? If it is, there's a continuous spectrum and the question doesn't make any sense. There is no lowest-energy state and [tex]\langle x\rangle[/tex] is not defined. [tex]\langle x\rangle = R_0/2[/tex] would be correct if there's another barrier at [tex]x=0.[/tex]
 
Thanks again for the help!

Using a BC of (\psi)(0) = 0 the question works out much better. I found one mistake in the question, and I'm guessing another was made and that it was intended to be a 1D version of a radial problem, given the notation of R0 which was only used for those types of questions, and the implied BC at x = 0.

Thanks again!
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
15K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K