Mass m in Ring of Radius r: Probability of Particle Existing is Zero

  • Thread starter Thread starter poohgwai
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particle Ring
poohgwai
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Consider a mass m confined to a ring of radius r. The potential everywhere on the ring is zero. In the ml = +3 state, identify the points on the ring where the probability of the particle existing is zero.

I was thinking that every point would be zero, because it's a wave, not a particle. It cannot exist at anyone point, basically. Am I thinking about this wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am guessing you are supposed to think about what standing wave function(s) would be allowed, given a ring of certain size and a particle of certain momentum. In all cases a standing wave will have nodes, and the probability of the particle being at a node is zero. If I remember correctly, you get the probability function by squaring the wave function and normalizing.

You are right, sort of, about a wave not really existing at any given point, but that is a macroscopic analogy and doesn't quite translate to the quantum world. In quantum, wave functions for particles do have places where they are "more likely to exist."
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top