Undergrad Imaginary Part of QHO Solutions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LarryS
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Imaginary
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the imaginary part of solutions to the Schrödinger equation for the Quantum Harmonic Oscillator (QHO). While the eigenfunctions are conventionally real, the imaginary part becomes relevant when considering time evolution or superpositions of eigenstates. Animated graphs illustrating both real and imaginary components are noted, but they represent real solutions multiplied by a complex phase factor. The conversation highlights the distinction between observable quantities, such as position-probability distributions, and the non-observable nature of the imaginary part. Overall, the imaginary part is significant in time-dependent states, particularly when analyzing wave packets.
LarryS
Gold Member
Messages
359
Reaction score
33
I have seen a few online lectures on solving the Schrödinger equation for the Quantum Harmonic Oscillator. The various solutions are products of the real-valued Gaussian function and the real-valued Hermite Polynomials. But I have never seen a mathematical expression for the imaginary part of those solutions. The Wikipedia entry for the QHO shows a graph for the imaginary part but no expression for it. Please help.

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
As always in QM, two wave functions differing only by a complex phase correspond to the same state. By convention, the eigenfunctions of the time-independent Schrödinger equation are chosen to be purely real. It is only when considering the time evolution of an eigenfunction, or when considering a wave function that is a superposition of eigenstates, that the complex part is not zero.
 
referframe said:
The Wikipedia entry for the QHO shows a graph for the imaginary part but no expression for it.
Are you referring to the animated graphs which have the real and imaginary parts in different colors? I’m pretty sure they’re just the real solutions of the time-independent SE, multiplied by the complex time-dependent phase factor: $$e^{-iEt/\hbar} = \cos (Et/\hbar) - i \sin(Et/\hbar)$$
 
referframe said:
I have seen a few online lectures on solving the Schrödinger equation for the Quantum Harmonic Oscillator. The various solutions are products of the real-valued Gaussian function and the real-valued Hermite Polynomials. But I have never seen a mathematical expression for the imaginary part of those solutions. The Wikipedia entry for the QHO shows a graph for the imaginary part but no expression for it.

DrClaude said:
As always in QM, two wave functions differing only by a complex phase correspond to the same state. By convention, the eigenfunctions of the time-independent Schrödinger equation are chosen to be purely real. It is only when considering the time evolution of an eigenfunction, or when considering a wave function that is a superposition of eigenstates, that the complex part is not zero.

jtbell said:
Are you referring to the animated graphs which have the real and imaginary parts in different colors? I’m pretty sure they’re just the real solutions of the time-independent SE, multiplied by the complex time-dependent phase factor: $$e^{-iEt/\hbar} = \cos (Et/\hbar) - i \sin(Et/\hbar)$$

The first four real/imaginary animations are examples of this, but the last two animations are superpositions of time-dependent stationary states, i.e., as my first quantum instructor would say, "There is (spatial) sloshing."
 
jtbell said:
Are you referring to the animated graphs which have the real and imaginary parts in different colors? I’m pretty sure they’re just the real solutions of the time-independent SE, multiplied by the complex time-dependent phase factor: $$e^{-iEt/\hbar} = \cos (Et/\hbar) - i \sin(Et/\hbar)$$
Well, that may well be true, but it doesn't have to do anything with the classical counterparts plotted as A and B. The only state referring to this classical case is a coherent state (depicted as plot H). It's of course misleading to show real and imaginary parts, which both are not observable. What's observable in a statistical sense, being position-probability distributions, are the modulus squares. Than it should be immediately clear that the energy eigenstates are stationary states, i.e., nothing is moving at all!
 
jtbell said:
Are you referring to the animated graphs which have the real and imaginary parts in different colors? I’m pretty sure they’re just the real solutions of the time-independent SE, multiplied by the complex time-dependent phase factor: $$e^{-iEt/\hbar} = \cos (Et/\hbar) - i \sin(Et/\hbar)$$
Yes, I was referring to those animated graphs. Thanks for the clarification.
 
The graphing of real and imaginary parts is useful with time-dependent states where the initial state is a displaced version of the gaussian ground state of SHO: ##\Psi (x,0) = A\exp\left[-b(x-\Delta x)^2\right]##. In that case the wavepacket at later times, ##\Psi (x,t)##, is also gaussian but the center of it will oscillate about the equilibrium point like a classical oscillator.

Here's a video about this:
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and LarryS

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K