Intro QM: Add a constant to the Potential, Effect on Wave Function?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a quantum mechanics problem concerning the addition of a constant potential energy term to a particle's potential energy. The original poster references a specific problem from Griffiths' QM text, seeking clarification on how this addition affects the wave function and the Schrödinger equation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to substitute a modified wave function into the Schrödinger equation to analyze the effect of the added potential. Some participants question the notation used and suggest differentiating between the wave functions with and without the added potential. Others engage in verifying the correctness of the equations derived from this substitution.

Discussion Status

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the nuances of quantum mechanics notation and the implications of modifying the potential energy in the context of the Schrödinger equation. There is an emphasis on ensuring clarity in the mathematical representation of the problem.

dotman
Messages
127
Reaction score
0
Hi, I've got a problem with the following problem. This is 1.8 out of Griffiths QM text, and was previously covered on this forum for another user in https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=152775", although that thread doesn't address my problem.

1. Suppose a constant potential energy,Vo, independent of x and t is added to a particle's potential energy. Show that this adds a time-dependent phase factor, [tex]e^{-iV_ot/\hbar}[/tex].

My attempt at the solution was, as stated in the other thread, to sub in [tex]\psi(x,t) e^{-iV_0 t/\hbar}[/tex] and see if that solves the Schrödinger eqn with the constant potential V0 added in:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{d\Psi}{dt} = \frac{-\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{d^2\Psi}{dx^2} + V(x)\Psi[/tex]

[tex]\psi=\psi e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}=\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}-\frac{iV_{0}}{\hbar}\psi e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}[/tex]

[tex]\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial x}=\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial x}e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}[/tex]

[tex]\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}=\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}[/tex]

[tex]i\hbar\left[\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}-\frac{iV_{0}}{\hbar}\psi e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}\right]=\frac{-\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}+V\psi e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow i\hbar\left[-\frac{iV_{0}}{\hbar}\psi e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}\right]+i\hbar\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}=\frac{-\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}+V\psi e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow i\hbar\left[-\frac{iV_{0}}{\hbar}\psi\right]+i\hbar\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}=\frac{-\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}+V\psi[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow-\frac{i^{2}V_{0}\hbar}{\hbar}\psi+i\hbar\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}=\frac{-\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}+V\psi[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow V_{0}\psi+i\hbar\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}=\frac{-\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}+V\psi[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow i\hbar\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}=\frac{-\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}+V\psi-V_{0}\psi[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow i\hbar\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}=\frac{-\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}+\left(V-V_{0}\right)\psi[/tex]

But we're supposed to have added the constant potential in, so it should look like:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}=\frac{-\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}+\left(V+V_{0}\right)\psi[/tex]

Have I made a mistake somewhere? Am I doing this wrong? Any help or advice would be appreciated.

Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
dotman said:
[tex]\psi=\psi e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}[/tex]

Ermm.. isn't this kind of like saying [itex]2=2e^{-iV_{0}t/\hbar}[/itex]?...Use two different variables to differentiate the wave function with the added constant potential from the wave function without the added constant potential (I'd recommend using [itex]\Psi(x,t)[/itex] and [itex]\psi(x,t)[/itex] respectively)...

What is the Schroedinger equation for [itex]\Psi(x,t)[/itex]? What is the Schroedinger equation for [itex]\psi(x,t)[/itex]?
 
Ok, well, yeah, that's bad notation. But notational issues aside, though, I don't see how this changes my result.

"Normal" Schrödinger equation:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{d\psi}{dt} = \frac{-\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{d^2\psi}{dx^2} + V\psi[/tex]

Schrödinger equation with the added potential factor:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{d\Psi}{dt} = \frac{-\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{d^2\Psi}{dx^2} + V(x)\Psi[/tex]

where [itex]\Psi=\psi e^{-iV_0t/\hbar}[/itex]

And using the partial derivatives [itex]\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t}[/itex], etc, of this, the rest of my result is the same:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{d\Psi}{dt} = \frac{-\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{d^2\Psi}{dx^2} + V(x)\Psi \Rightarrow i\hbar\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}=\frac{-\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}+\left(V-V_{0}\right)\psi[/tex]

What am I missing?
 
Oh wait, I see it now.

That second eqn should be:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{d\Psi}{dt} = \frac{-\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{d^2\Psi}{dx^2} + (V+V_0)\Psi[/tex]

And so it reduces to the original equation, thus showing that it is, in fact a solution of the Schrödinger equation with the added potential.

Look right?
 
dotman said:
Oh wait, I see it now.

That second eqn should be:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{d\Psi}{dt} = \frac{-\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{d^2\Psi}{dx^2} + (V+V_0)\Psi[/tex]

And so it reduces to the original equation, thus showing that it is, in fact a solution of the Schrödinger equation with the added potential.

Look right?

Yup, exactly!:smile:
 
Thanks for the help gabba!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
95
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K