When dealing with Dirichlet boundary conditions, that is asking for the wavefunction to be exactly zero at the boundaries, it can be clearly seen that (0,0,0) is not a physical situation as it is not normalizable. (Wavefunction becomes just 0 then)(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

However when dealing with periodic boundary conditions, the basis is spanned by ##e^{i\vec{k}.\vec{r}}## where the only condition on ##\vec{k}## is that it has to correspond with ##L^{3}## cubic periodicity.

The problem now is that ##\vec{k}=0## does seem to give a non trivial solution with zero energy ##\Psi=constant## which is periodic and noralizable.

How do I interpret this werid 'constant' term in the general wavefunction part?

Sources:

Kittel eigth edition, p137

http://people.umass.edu/bvs/pbc.pdf

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# (kx,ky,kz)=(0,0,0) solution for a free particle with PBC?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**