Limits of Integration in the Transmission Coefficient

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the limits of integration in the transmission coefficient equation from Nouredine Zettili's "Quantum Mechanics." The participants identify an error in equation (9.446), where the limits of integration are incorrectly set, leading to a negative value for the parameter ##\gamma##. The correct approach requires maintaining the lower limit at zero and ensuring that the limits are not switched, particularly when applying the WKB approximation for tunneling scenarios. The correct evaluation of the integral confirms that the transmission coefficient ##T## remains consistent for both left-to-right and right-to-left tunneling.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics, specifically tunneling phenomena.
  • Familiarity with the WKB approximation in quantum mechanics.
  • Knowledge of integral calculus, particularly improper integrals.
  • Experience with Beta and Gamma functions in mathematical physics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the derivation of the WKB approximation in quantum mechanics.
  • Study the properties and applications of the Beta function and Gamma function.
  • Examine the implications of switching limits in integrals and its effects on physical interpretations.
  • Analyze the transmission coefficient in various potential barrier scenarios.
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, graduate students in physics, and researchers focusing on quantum tunneling and mathematical methods in quantum mechanics.

Samama Fahim
Messages
52
Reaction score
4
Homework Statement
Why are the limits of integration swapped in the following equation without introducing a minus sign?
Relevant Equations
##\int_0^1\sqrt{\frac{1}{x}-1}dx##
zetilli limits of integ.JPG


Initially '0' is the upper limit and ##a = \frac{Ze^2}{E}## is the lower limit. With change of variable ##x = \frac{Er}{Ze^2}##, for ##r=0##, ##x=0##, and for ##r=\frac{Ze^2}{E}##, ##x=1##, so 1 should be the lower limit. However, he takes 1 as the upper limit, and without a minus sign. Why is that?

(from Quantum Mechanics, Nouredine Zettili)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It appears to me that the error is in equation (9.446) of the text. ##\gamma## should be positive. But the way the limits are set up in the integral of (9.446), ##\gamma## will come out negative (since ##dr## in the integral will be negative). So, I think the limits should be switched in this integral with the lower limit being zero. The text refers back to (9.247). Does (9.247) agree with (9.446)?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2 and vela
TSny said:
It appears to me that the error is in equation (9.446) of the text. ##\gamma## should be positive. But the way the limits are set up in the integral of (9.446), ##\gamma## will come out negative (since ##dr## in the integral will be negative). So, I think the limits should be switched in this integral with the lower limit being zero. The text refers back to (9.247). Does (9.247) agree with (9.446)?
9.247 reads ##T \backsim e^{-2\gamma}##, ##\gamma = \frac{1}{\hbar}\int_{x_1}^{x_2}\sqrt{2m(V-E)} dx##
 
Samama Fahim said:
9.247 reads ##T \backsim e^{-2\gamma}##, ##\gamma = \frac{1}{\hbar}\int_{x_1}^{x_2}\sqrt{2m(V-E)} dx##
OK. This was probably discussed for the case where the particle tunnels from left to right through the barrier. That is, ##x_1## is the turning point on the left side and ##x_2## is the turning point on the right side. So, ##x_2 > x_1##.

The same formula (with no change in the integration limits for ##\gamma##) is valid in the WKB approximation if the particle tunnels from right to left through the barrier. The textbook appears to have made the mistake of assuming that the limits of integration should be switched in this case. You shouldn't switch the limits.

For example, suppose the potential barrier is symmetrically shaped, as shown.
1652727712064.png

Clearly, the transmission coefficient ##T## for right-to-left tunneling is the same as for left-to-right tunneling. In both cases, the turning point on the left (##x_1##) should be the lower limit of integration in the expression for ##\gamma##. Switching the limits would change ##T##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Samama Fahim
I think there was a misprint in the limits of integration of equ. 9.448. You have
$$
\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_1^{0}\sqrt{\frac{1}{x}-1}dx
$$
Make the substitution ##t=\frac{1}{x}-1## with ##dx=-\frac{dt}{(u+1)^2}## the integral becomes
$$
I=-\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_{\infty}^0 \frac{t^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(t+1)^2}dt
$$
$$
=\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(t+1)^2}dt
$$
Using the formula for the Beta function
$$
B(x,y)=\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{x-1}}{(t+1)^{x+y}}dt
$$
and the Beta function in terms of Gamma functions,
$$
B(x,y)=\frac{\Gamma (x) \Gamma (y)}{\Gamma (x +y)}
$$
We find
$$
I=\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}B(\frac{3}{2},\frac{1}{2})=\frac{\pi Ze^2\sqrt{m}}{\hbar \sqrt{2E}}
$$
which is the obtained result in equ. 9.448.
 
Fred Wright said:
I think there was a misprint in the limits of integration of equ. 9.448. You have
$$
\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_1^{0}\sqrt{\frac{1}{x}-1}dx
$$
Make the substitution ##t=\frac{1}{x}-1## with ##dx=-\frac{dt}{(u+1)^2}## the integral becomes
$$
I=-\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_{\infty}^0 \frac{t^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(t+1)^2}dt
$$

Wouldn't the limits of integration be switched in the last line above? The substitution ##t=\frac{1}{x}-1## gives ##t = 0## when ##x= 1##, and ##t = \infty## when ##x = 0##.

So, with the substitution ##t=\frac{1}{x}-1##, $$ \int_1^0\sqrt{\frac{1}{x}-1}dx = -\int_0^\infty \frac{t^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(t+1)^2}dt$$
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K