How to prove that for any bound electronic state, < p > = 0

In summary, if a bound electronic state has zero average electronic momentum, then <p> must also be zero.
  • #1
ani4physics
29
0
Hey all. So, I understand that every bound electronic state will have zero average electronic momentum, because otherwise the electron will fly off the atom. But how do I show mathematically that < p > = 0 for any bound state. Any help or reference greatly appreciated. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Try relating [tex]\langle p \rangle[/tex] to [tex] \frac{d}{dt} \langle x \rangle [/tex] (Ehrenfest's Theorem). If "bound state" means "stationary state in a time-independent potential", then use the fact that [tex] \frac{d}{dt} \langle x \rangle = 0 [/tex].
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Sando said:
Try relating [tex]\langle p \rangle[/tex] to [tex] \frac{d}{dt} \langle x \rangle [/tex] (Ehrenfest's Theorem). If "bound state" means "stationary state in a time-independent potential", then [tex] \frac{d}{dt} \langle x \rangle = 0 [/tex].

If d<x>/dt = 0 then that means <p> is a constant. but how I prove that <p> = 0?
 
  • #4
ani4physics said:
Hey all. So, I understand that every bound electronic state will have zero average electronic momentum, because otherwise the electron will fly off the atom. But how do I show mathematically that < p > = 0 for any bound state. Any help or reference greatly appreciated. Thanks.

The atom's hamiltonian commutes with the parity operator P. Hence any energy eigenstate [tex]|\psi>}[/tex] must have definite parity:

[tex]P|\psi>=\pm|\psi>[/tex]

Now, the momentum operator changes sign under parity

[tex]PpP^\dagger=-p[/tex]

So, using [tex]P^\dagger P = I[/tex], we find

[tex]<\psi|p|\psi>=(<\psi|P^\dagger)( P p P^\dagger) (P|\psi>)=-<\psi|p|\psi>[/tex]

hence

[tex]<\psi|p|\psi>=0[/tex]
 
  • #5
Petr Mugver said:
The atom's hamiltonian commutes with the parity operator P. Hence any energy eigenstate [tex]|\psi>}[/tex] must have definite parity:

[tex]P|\psi>=\pm|\psi>[/tex]

This is not properly justified. You did not use the knowledge that the state is "bounded" (whatever it means rigorously...?)

Now, the momentum operator changes sign under parity

[tex]PpP^\dagger=-p[/tex]

So, using [tex]P^\dagger P = I[/tex], we find

[tex]<\psi|p|\psi>=(<\psi|P^\dagger)( P p P^\dagger) (P|\psi>)=-<\psi|p|\psi>[/tex]

hence

[tex]<\psi|p|\psi>=0[/tex]

For example set [itex]V=0[/itex]. The Hamiltonian of a free particle commutes with the parity operator too, but still its eigenstates [itex]\psi(x)=e^{ikx}[/itex] don't satisfy [itex]P|\psi\rangle = \pm|\psi\rangle[/itex].

How do you prove, that bounded states are non-degenerate? That would help. In the previous counter example the eigenstates [itex]\sin(kx)[/itex] and [itex]\cos(kx)[/itex] would be eigenstates of parity operator, but their linear combinations are not.
 
  • #6
For a time independent potential:

[tex] \langle p \rangle = m \frac{d}{dt} \langle x \rangle [/tex]

which is zero for a bound state.
 
  • #7
ok someone please tell me if this is right:

d<p>/dt = <F> : this is always valid. so if I want to calculate the average force on a particle in any stationary state / non stationary state, I can just calculate the average momentum and take the time derivative.

For example, if I have an atom in presence of a time-dependent potential, I can calculate the perturbed wave function using time-dependent perturbation theory, then take the average of p over the perturbed wave function and then take its time derivative to get the average force. Is that right?
 
  • #8
You can easily show that it's time independent, but showing it equal to 0 is a much stronger statement. Compute the integral in the case of the infinite square potential in 1 dimension. Is the integral = 0 ?
 
  • #9
bigubau said:
You can easily show that it's time independent, but showing it equal to 0 is a much stronger statement. Compute the integral in the case of the infinite square potential in 1 dimension. Is the integral = 0 ?

yeah I can show that it's time independent. For example, consider the ground electronic state of an atom in absence of any external field. then in ground state,

<p> = <psi * Exp[i * w * t] ] p [psi * Exp [ -i * w *t]>

= <psi] p [psi>

= time independent.

but, is <p> = 0? someone told me it's = 0 but I can't understand why.

Also, someone please tell me if my previous post is right or wrong.
 

1. What does the statement < p > = 0 mean in the context of bound electronic states?

The symbol < p > represents the momentum operator in quantum mechanics. Therefore, the statement < p > = 0 means that the average momentum of a bound electronic state is equal to zero.

2. How do we prove that < p > = 0 for any bound electronic state?

This can be proven by using the mathematical expression for the average momentum of a bound state, which involves the wave function and the momentum operator. By solving for this expression and taking into account the properties of bound states, it can be shown that the average momentum is indeed equal to zero.

3. Why is it important to prove that < p > = 0 for bound electronic states?

This is important because it helps us understand the behavior and properties of bound electronic states. By knowing that the average momentum is zero, we can make certain predictions and calculations about these states that are crucial in various fields such as quantum chemistry and materials science.

4. Are there any exceptions to the statement < p > = 0 for bound electronic states?

Yes, there are exceptions in certain cases where the bound state is in an excited state or interacting with other particles. In these cases, the average momentum may not be exactly equal to zero, but it will still be very close to zero and follow the same principles.

5. How does the statement < p > = 0 relate to the uncertainty principle?

The statement < p > = 0 is a consequence of the uncertainty principle, which states that the more precisely we know the momentum of a particle, the less we know about its position, and vice versa. Since bound states have a well-defined position, their average momentum must be zero in order to satisfy the uncertainty principle.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
938
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
12
Views
10K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top