Infinite potential well- Delta potential inside

noamriemer
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Hello again. Thank you guys. You have been great help...

I have another one:

Given a potential well- 2a is it's width, and in the middle - there is a delta potential:

V(x)= \frac {\hbar^2} {2m} \frac {\lambda} {a} \delta(x)

I am looking for the odd solution to this problem.

I thought I should answer:
I know odd solutions vanish for x=0. Therefore, \psi'(0)=0
So I am looking at a "normal potential well": \varphi_n=\frac {1} {\sqrt a} sin(\frac {\pi nx} {2a} ) for n=0,2,4,...

But in the solution- they got the same result, only for n=1,2,3,4,...
Why is that so? in the general solution for infinite well, the sin refers to the even n's...

Later on, I want to find the even states...
So I was trying to find a cosine based solution ... and I saw that again, in the solution, they were looking for a sine solution...
Why?

I think I am mixing things here, but as far as I understood- sine refers to the anti-symmetrical states, and to even n's, and the cosine - to symmetrical states and odd n's...
Thank you sooooo much!
Noam
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why don't you try starting from the Schrodinger equation... plug in the given potential, and try a solution of the form \psi(x) = A e^{\lambda x}.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top