Identical fermions in a box - degenerate states

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dipole
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Box Fermions States
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the ground state of two identical fermions in a one-dimensional box, specifically addressing the question of degeneracy in quantum states and the implications of the Pauli exclusion principle. Participants explore the nature of the wave function for identical particles and the energy levels associated with different configurations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the ground state wave function for two identical fermions and questions why it is considered non-degenerate, particularly regarding the states \(\psi_{12}\) and \(\psi_{21}\).
  • Another participant mentions the Pauli exclusion principle but does not directly address the degeneracy question raised.
  • A subsequent reply clarifies that the indistinguishability of the particles means that \(\psi_{12}\) and \(\psi_{21}\) represent the same physical state, thus eliminating the possibility of degeneracy in this context.
  • It is noted that the next possible state, \(\psi_{13}\), involves one particle in the ground state and the other in the second excited state, which is higher in energy than \(\psi_{12}\).
  • One participant acknowledges the distinction between distinguishable and indistinguishable particles, confirming that the states are not degenerate for identical fermions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the implications of indistinguishability for the states of identical fermions, but there is some initial confusion regarding the nature of degeneracy and the role of the Pauli exclusion principle.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve all aspects of degeneracy and the implications of the Pauli exclusion principle, leaving some nuances regarding the interpretation of wave functions and energy states open for further exploration.

dipole
Messages
553
Reaction score
149
The ground state for two identical fermions in a box (in 1D) is given by:

[itex]\psi (x_{1},x_{2})_{12} = \frac{\sqrt{2}}{a}[sin(\pi x_{1}/a)sin(2\pi x_{2}/a) - sin(2\pi x_{1}/a)sin(\pi x_{2}/a)][/itex]

The book I'm reading though says that this state is non degenerate, and that the next excited state is [itex]\psi_{13}[/itex]. My question is, why is the ground state not degenerate? Why can't you have either [itex]\psi_{12}[/itex] or [itex]\psi_{21}[/itex] which would have the same energy?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Pauli's exclusion principle. EDIT: See below.
 
Last edited:
I don't see how that answers my question.

Pauli exclusion principle determines the form of the wave function, and it forbids the [itex]\psi_{22}[/itex] state, but that doesn't explain to me why you can't have either [itex]\psi_{12}[/itex] or [itex]\psi_{21}[/itex] and have a doubly degenerate ground state.
 
EDIT: Misread what you were asking exactly. Changing.

Sorry, thought you were asking about if you added another fermion.

But you have to remember that the particles are identical, so the order of your subscripts doesn't matter in this case because you cannot distinguish between the two particles. Pauli's Exlusion Principle is already in play here by the fact that one particle is in the ground state (of the one particle system) and another particle is in the first excited state (of the one particle system). You can't have the [itex]\psi_{11}[/itex] and by extension neither the [itex]\psi_{22}[/itex]. So the next possible superposition would be the [itex]\psi_{13}[/itex] where one particle is in the ground state and the other is in the second excited state. And since this has a higher energy than the [itex]\psi_{12}[/itex] state, then this represents the first excited state of the two particle system.
 
Last edited:
Ah I see, so in distinguishable particles, the [itex]\psi_{12}[/itex] and [itex]\psi_{21}[/itex] are degenerate, but for indistinguishable particles they really represent the same state.

That makes perfect sense, thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K