Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Kinetic energy in quantum mechanics

  1. Dec 21, 2014 #1
    Given psi as function of x^2, and the potential energy as function of x, find the kinetic energy.

    My reasoning:
    KE=P^2/2m and use the momentum operator.

    My professor's reasoning:
    Calculate the hamiltonian operator and subtract the potential energy then divide by psi.

    Note:
    I talked to my professor about the part where he divided by psi since then kinetic energy will be a function of x which supposedly implies that momentum is a function of x which goes against the uncertainty principle. He didnt give me a statisfactory reply, and i feel that i might be having a concept hole.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 21, 2014 #2

    bhobba

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Last edited by a moderator: May 7, 2017
  4. Dec 22, 2014 #3
    So it is wrong to divide by psi... Phew life makes so much more sense now... Thank you you recommended Ballentine a couple of times for me now, and i will surely check this "holy grail of QM" :D thank you
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 7, 2017
  5. Dec 23, 2014 #4
    Last edited by a moderator: May 7, 2017
  6. Dec 23, 2014 #5

    bhobba

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Basically symmetry considerations mean the energy and momentum operator must be the form it is and a free particle must be as p^2/2m.

    Thanks
    Bill
     
  7. Dec 23, 2014 #6
    I just need to make sure... Do we have to divide by psi? H(psi)=E(psi) so does E equal H(psi)/psi ?
     
  8. Dec 23, 2014 #7
    Or even if KE(psi)=KE(psi) so KE=KE(psi)/psi ?
     
  9. Dec 23, 2014 #8

    bhobba

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Its p^2/2m where P in the momentum operator - you had it correct from the start.

    I don't know where this divide by psi comes from.

    Thanks
    Bill
     
  10. Dec 23, 2014 #9

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    I'm not sure, whether I understand the question you ask right. I guess, you study nonrelativistic quantum mechanics in the position representation, i.e., Schrödinger wave mechanics. For a particle moving in one spatial dimension, the usual Hamilton operator then looks
    $$\hat{H}=-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2+V(x),$$
    where ##V## is some potential (or 0 for free particles).

    Now given a wave function, ##\psi(x)##, representing a state, i.e., a square-integrable function, which can be (by convention to make life easier) normalized to 1,
    $$\int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} x |\psi(x)|^2=1,$$
    it doesn't make too much sense to ask about what the kinetic energy might be. One "translation" of this vague idea, which makes sense, to ask for the expectation value of the kinetic energy. The operator for kinetic energy is the first term in the Hamiltonian, i.e.,
    $$\hat{T}=-\frac{\hbar}{2m} \partial_x^2.$$
    The expectation value is then given by
    $$\langle T \rangle_{\psi} = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} x \psi^*(x) \hat{T} \psi(x)= \int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} x \psi^*(x) \left [-\frac{\hbar}{2m} \partial_x^2 \psi \right ].$$
    Nowhere you have to divide by the wave function. Why should one?

    Enough of speculation: Do you have a completely formulated question by your professor to answer?
     
  11. Dec 23, 2014 #10

    atyy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Did he divide by psi or the "square" of psi? If the latter, then it is just a normalization, as vanhees71 is writing in post #9. Usually the wave function is normalized in the first step, so that dividing by the "square" of psi is just dividing by one. It is a matter of convention whether to use a normalized or unnormalized state.
     
  12. Dec 23, 2014 #11

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    Hm, but then you have to divide by the integral over the (modulus) squared wave function and not simply through the square...
     
  13. Dec 23, 2014 #12
    kishki.jpg

    The whole question was about finding the kinetic energy, the two solutions (mine and the professor's differed) i got very confused due to what he did.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 23, 2014
  14. Dec 23, 2014 #13

    bhobba

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The dividing by psi is not valid. What you did is.

    Thanks
    Bill
     
  15. Dec 23, 2014 #14
    I will have to talk to my professor about that, so i have to argue against dividing by psi, but i just cant find the right argument as to why he is wrong. I could say that dividing by psi to find the kinetic energy makes the schrodinger equation meaningless as a statement of the conservation of energy? But i dont know why i feel that the whole question is meaningless when examined under the light of the uncertainty principle - how could one even determine the kinetic energy as a function of x?
     
  16. Dec 23, 2014 #15
    Or mathematically speaking, you can not remove the function that the operator acts on, and since E and U are operators it is mathematically erroneous to divide by psi as my professor did?
     
  17. Dec 23, 2014 #16

    bhobba

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Of course.

    Think about it. You have converted an equation equating vectors to one equating operators. It makes no sense.

    Thanks
    Bill
     
  18. Dec 23, 2014 #17
    Thank you very much.. I hope he is convinced, specially since this was a question in our mid term
     
  19. Dec 24, 2014 #18

    atyy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Yes, I was just sketching what I thought the OP's professor might have been thinking of. I think the OP should write the exact question, otherwise it's hard to know what is being asked.
     
  20. Dec 24, 2014 #19
    The question was exactly as mentioned in the post, except it had the psi and potential energy as functions. All it asked was to find the kinetic energy in terms of h bar and mass. The function of psi and u was a little bit messy.. I actually have another question now, what does it even mean to calculate the kinetic energy in quantum mechanics?
     
  21. Dec 24, 2014 #20

    bhobba

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It means p^2/2m where p is the momentum operator applied to the wavefunctions allowable from the Schroedinger equation.

    Thanks
    Bill
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook