I I would like an explanation of these extra energy states

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter hmparticle9
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quantum mechahnics
hmparticle9
Messages
151
Reaction score
26
I just solved the Schrödinger equation with the potential:

$$
V(x) =
\begin{array}{cc}
\ \{ &
\begin{array}{cc}
\alpha\delta(x) & -a \leq x\leq a \\
\infty & \text{otherwise}
\end{array}
\end{array}
$$
in two ways.

The potential is an even function so we can look for even/odd solutions and only concentrate on one side of the well. I am only going to look at the even solutions, as that is where the pertinent behaviour is happening.

The first way is to assume that the stationary states have the form:
$$\psi = A\sin(kx) + B\cos(kx)$$

The second way is to assume they have the form:
$$\psi = Ae^{ikx} + Be^{-ikx}$$

where ##k = \frac{\sqrt{2mE}}{h^2}##, and ##h## is Planks constant.

after using the boundary conditions I obtained a transcendental equation for the energies using each method.

In the first I obtain:

$$\tan(ka) = -\frac{h^2k}{m\alpha}$$

In the second I obtain:

$$\frac{h^2k}{m\alpha} = \sqrt{\frac{1}{2\cos(2ka) + 2}}$$

If we plot these functions, we can see that in the first case (for sufficiently small ##\alpha##) we obtain ##k = \frac{n\pi}{2}## for ##n = 1,3,5,...## and in the second case we get the same (well similar, they approach each other for small enough ##\alpha##) values of ##k##. But for the second method we get another solution on the other side of the asymptote. The solution to the right of the asymptote agrees with the solutions obtained using the first method, but the solutions to the left of the asymptote do not appear using the first method.

>I would like to know why this is happening. Maybe it is nothing major but it has peaked by curiosity.

Even if we take ##\alpha## to the extremes they behave very similarly. That is, as ##\alpha## gets larger the values of ##k## tend to ##\frac{n\pi}{a}##. Indicative of a well of half the width. If ##\alpha## gets smaller, we get closer and closer to the energy states where there is not a delta function in the middle. So I am comfortable that my equations are correct.

In fact, if we see that when ##\alpha## gets larger the "extra" solution I am getting is quite far away from the solution that both methods agreed on.

My terminology is probably quite off, so any feedback is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you use the same boundary conditions in the two methods? If not, that's the explanation of the different spectra. If yes, I suspect that you have made some error in the calculation.
 
hmparticle9 said:
after using the boundary conditions I obtained a transcendental equation for the energies using each method.

In the first I obtain:

$$\tan(ka) = -\frac{h^2k}{m\alpha}$$

In the second I obtain:

$$\frac{h^2k}{m\alpha} = \sqrt{\frac{1}{2\cos(2ka) + 2}}$$

If the first equation is correct, then the second equation asserts that <br /> -\tan ka = \sqrt{\frac{1}{2\cos (2ka) + 2}} = \pm\frac 12 |\sec ka| which is clearly incorrect. Since you haven't shown your working for either derivation, we cannot see where you may have fallen into error.
 
I see. Thanks. Out of interest, when is it best to use ##\sin## and ##\cos## over complex exponential?
 
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Back
Top