Imaginary Residuals in Solving the Schrodinger Equation

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob3141592
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Imaginary
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the treatment of imaginary components in solutions to the Schrödinger equation, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of these imaginary parts on wave functions, measurement outcomes, and the conceptual understanding of quantum systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant recalls that imaginary parts of solutions to the Schrödinger equation were ignored in their past experience, questioning whether this is a valid approach.
  • Another participant asserts that wave functions can have non-zero imaginary components, but actual measurement results must be real numbers.
  • A different participant challenges the idea of ignoring imaginary parts, stating that they contribute to quantum interference effects, which are experimentally validated.
  • Further inquiries are made about the status of imaginary components during measurement, with questions about whether they are zero or if measurements only sample the real part of the wave function.
  • Responses clarify that the imaginary components of the wave function are not zero during measurement, and that measurements yield probabilities based on the squared modulus of complex amplitudes.
  • It is noted that while the modulus of a complex number is real, it depends on both the real and imaginary parts of the number.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the treatment of imaginary components in quantum mechanics. While some agree that wave functions can have non-zero imaginary parts, there is no consensus on how these components relate to measurement outcomes and their significance in predictions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights uncertainties regarding the interpretation of imaginary components in wave functions and their role in measurements, as well as the implications for understanding quantum mechanics.

Bob3141592
Messages
236
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
An amateur asks: Do any solutions of quantum systems have non-zero imaginary components?
I guess the summary says it all, if the question is clear enough. The last time I took physics courses was 45 years ago, and the QM course blew my mind, meaning I was mostly baffled. I could not wrap my head around it, and without a conceptual framework I couldn't remember the details. So I basically washed out into computers, which at the time was a good option. Anyway, I kinda know some stuff, but mostly I know nothing.

I sort of remember in solving the Schrödinger equation (probably time independent but I doubt it matters), there were leftover imaginary parts that were just crossed off the blackboard. I was under the impression at the time that these imaginary residuals were just ignored. I don't recall the professor ever arguing that they must be zero. He may have, but if he did I missed the point. I missed a lot, for example, I have never worked with Dirac notation. But that was then, and I'd like to know now. It's a fairly general question that I don't know how to research, so I'll just ask here.

Any comments will be very appreciated. TIA
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bob3141592 said:
Do any solutions of quantum systems have non-zero imaginary components?

It depends on what you mean by "solutions". Wave functions, i.e., mathematical solutions of the Schrödinger Equation, can certainly take values with non-zero imaginary components. But any actual observed result of a measurement must be a real number.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and sysprog
Bob3141592 said:
I sort of remember in solving the Schrödinger equation (probably time independent but I doubt it matters), there were leftover imaginary parts that were just crossed off the blackboard.

This sounds somewhat fishy. The nonzero imaginary parts of wave functions produce quantum interference effects, which are well established experimentally (and indeed were among the main results that convinced physicists that classical, pre-quantum physics would not work), so you can't just cross them out and expect to make valid predictions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and sysprog
PeterDonis said:
It depends on what you mean by "solutions". Wave functions, i.e., mathematical solutions of the Schrödinger Equation, can certainly take values with non-zero imaginary components. But any actual observed result of a measurement must be a real number.

Yes, thanks, I get that. Let me ask this way. When the measurement is made, at that point is the coefficients of the imaginary components zero? Is the measurement only sampling the real part while the imaginary part could be anything, or is the measurement sampling the real part at it's "greatest extent" while the imaginary component is zero?
 
Bob3141592 said:
When the measurement is made, at that point is the coefficients of the imaginary components zero?

The imaginary components of what? Of the wave function? Of course not. The result you get from the measurement has to be a real number, but that number is not the same as the value of the wave function.

Bob3141592 said:
Is the measurement only sampling the real part while the imaginary part could be anything, or is the measurement sampling the real part at it's "greatest extent" while the imaginary component is zero?

No to both. The wave function gives you probabilities for various possible measurement outcomes; you obtain those probabilities by taking the squared modulus of the complex amplitudes that appear in the wave function.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sysprog
PeterDonis said:
you obtain those probabilities by taking the squared modulus of the complex amplitudes

And adding a little bit: the modulus of a complex number is real, but it certainly depends on both the real and imaginary parts of the number we start with. ##z=1+2i## has non-zero imgainary part, but ##|z|^2=1^2+2^2=5## is real and depends on the ##2##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K