Is My Approach to the Gaussian Wave Packet Problem Professional?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BlondEgg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quantum Wave
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the evaluation of a solution to the Gaussian wave packet problem. Parts (i) and (ii) are deemed professionally explained, while part (iii) lacks professionalism due to an unsupported assertion regarding the probability density's behavior over time. To strengthen the argument, it's necessary to perform the integral in equation (13) and demonstrate how the width of the wave packet is time-dependent. The feedback emphasizes the importance of rigorous justification in quantum mechanics discussions. Overall, the approach requires more thorough analysis to be considered professional.
BlondEgg
Messages
4
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
Problem involving normalization and Fourier transform
Relevant Equations
Wave function
hi,

I'm solving this statement,
1721513977862.png

1721513995402.png

We split into parts
1721514094971.png

1721514116323.png

1721514143924.png

Can some expert in Quantum say that my working is professional?
Kind wishes to you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Parts (i) and (ii) are rigorously explained so one may say that they are professionally done. Part (iii) is not "professional", mainly because you make an assertion without justifying it. You say that "the probability density ##~| \Psi(x,t)|^2~## spreads over time indicating that the wave packet disperses as time progresses." To make the argument stick, you need to do the integral in equation (13), find ##~|\Psi(x,t)|^2~##, identify the width and argue that it is time-dependent.
 
  • Like
Likes Greg Bernhardt
So is there some elegant way to do this or am I just supposed to follow my nose and sub the Taylor expansions for terms in the two boost matrices under the assumption ##v,w\ll 1##, then do three ugly matrix multiplications and get some horrifying kludge for ##R## and show that the product of ##R## and its transpose is the identity matrix with det(R)=1? Without loss of generality I made ##\mathbf{v}## point along the x-axis and since ##\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{w} = 0## I set ##w_1 = 0## to...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K