Graduate How to calculate the parabolic cylinder function D

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the parabolic cylinder function D in the context of quantum mechanics, specifically for a computational project involving a quadratic barrier. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the notation and the application of the parabolic cylinder function, which is derived from the Weber equation. Key insights reveal that the parabolic cylinder functions are normalizable only for specific values of energy (k) and can be expressed in terms of Hermite polynomials. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the underlying concepts of harmonic oscillators and potential barriers in quantum mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly harmonic oscillators
  • Familiarity with differential equations and their solutions
  • Knowledge of parabolic cylinder functions and their relation to Weber equations
  • Experience with numerical approximation techniques in computational physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and properties of parabolic cylinder functions from Weber equations
  • Learn about Hermite polynomials and their applications in quantum mechanics
  • Explore numerical methods for approximating solutions to differential equations
  • Review quantum mechanics textbooks, such as "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths, focusing on harmonic oscillators
USEFUL FOR

Quantum mechanics students, computational physicists, and anyone involved in numerical simulations of quantum systems will benefit from this discussion.

BiGyElLoWhAt
Gold Member
Messages
1,637
Reaction score
138
I have a computational project to do for quantum, and I am kind of tired of doing basic barriers, so I decided to try a quadratic barrier. Well, you get garbage. However, since I'm working with numerical approximations anyways, I figured I might try it, but I am not sure how to proceed. Here is what wolfram gives me:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=-h^2/(2*m)*y''+++x^2*y+=+k*y

Note: k == Energy, I just used k because it changed E -> e.

If you scroll down and see the solution, it is in terms of the parabolic cylinder function D which is the solution to weber equations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabolic_cylinder_function
I am not really getting what to do with this.
I'm not sure on the notation used, and the link is no help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramowitz_and_Stegun

Can someone give me advice on how to numerically approximate this function?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First, I don't see that you are calculating a quadratic barrier but rather a simple harmonic oscillator. For a barrier, the x^2 term has to have negative sign.
Further note that you didn't specify that your solution shall be normalizable. Hence you get two solutions for every value of k. Only for special values of k, at least one solution is normalizable. In the case of the parabolic cylinder function, this happens when the confluent hypergeometric functions in its definition, which are basically defined via their Fourier series, is a polynomial of finite order. These polynomials are the Hermite polynomials and you recover the ordinary solutions of the harmonic oscillator equation. What you can do if you want to study tunnelling, is to shift the HO to the left and right and use the left shifted version for x<0 and the right shifted version for x>0. To obtain a solution for the full range, you have to glue together the correspondingly shifted Weber functions at x=0 so that the overall solution is normalizable.
 
Why would the quadratic potential barrier be negative? P^2/2m + V = E. The V is positive, so if my potential is x^2, shouldn't that he positive in my equation?
 
Because it has a minimum and not a maximum at x=0.
 
You're losing me.

x^2 has a minimum at x = 0
-(x^2) has a maximum at x=0

So I want a minimum at x = 0 for the PE, which means I want V(x) = x^2. If this is wrong correct me, but otherwise I have no idea what you're saying.
 
You said you are interested in barriers. For me a barrier is a maximum in potential energy, not minimum.
 
I'm thinking V=0 at x=0 V=1 at x=1,-1, etx, confining the particle to near x=0. "Confining".

Sort of like a potential well, but quadratic in nature.
 
Ok, so this sounds like an ordinary harmonic oscillator problem. I still don't quite get why you are talking of a quadratic "barrier".
 
V (x) = x^2
I plugged in the diff eq to wolfram and got an answer in terms of the parabolic cylinder function.
 
  • #10
Yes, parabolic cylinder functions are the general solutions of the differential equation. But only for special values of k, these functions are normalizable, i.e. are functions belonging to the Hilbert space of normalizable functions. In this case, the cylinder functions can be expressed in terms of Hermite polynomials. I tried to explain this already in #2.
I still don't understand why you are talking of a barrier.
 
  • #11
I didn't plan for this to be the haronic oscillator. I simply picked a value for Vthat was reasonably different from what we've done in class. I suppose this relates to the oscillator when k=2.

Is a quadratic well more suiting?

Anyways, I read about them on wofram, and didn't see much other than how to type it into mathematica. I read the wikipedia page and didn't understand the notation that was being used. I more or less want to know how to calculate these functions so I can make a simulation for this.
 
  • #12
You have to understand that it is difficult to answer your questions when we do not even know what kind of classes you are taking, nor what your background in quantum mechanics is. Do you use some specific textbook on QM? Every textbook contains a section on how to solve the harmonic oscillator and some books even on parabolic cylinder functions (Landau & Lifshitz, quite certainly).
 
  • #13
We have a book that we don't really use much. An intro to qm by griffiths. It's basically been a reference, and I can count the number of times I've actually used it on one hand.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K