Mathematical conundrum when adding complex exponentials

Runei
Messages
193
Reaction score
17
Hi there,

Once again I find myself twiddling around with some quantum mechanics, and I bumped into something I find strange. I can't see what the error of my thinking is, so I hope someone could be able to point it out.

I'm looking at solutions to the infinite square well, and arrive at the simple differential equation

\frac{d^2\Psi}{dx^2} = -k^2 \Psi

The solution to this can be written in terms of complex exponentials or sines and cosines. I bumped into the weird stuff when I use complex exponentials.

So the general solution in that case would be

##\Psi(x) = Ae^{ikx}+Be^{-ikx}##

Now, what I then started thinking was: "Hmmm... This could be viewed mathematically as a sum of two vectors, and solution is simply another vector."

So I drew this picture to illustrate the idea:

?temp_hash=98f0bfa6626fe3330472390e3bfc5456.png

So from that perspective it seems that the solution could also be written as

##\Psi(x) = Ce^{ik'x}##

However, using the simple constraints of the infinite square well quickly leads to problems - namely:

##|\Psi(0)|^2 = 0##

##C = 0##

So... Now really what I had hoped for. Where am I going taking a wrong turn? Has it to do with the x? That x should be x' also?

Thanks in advance :)
 

Attachments

  • drawing.png
    drawing.png
    6.7 KB · Views: 684
Physics news on Phys.org
The problem is that your ##k'## is going to be a function of ##x##. As such, you can not assume it to be constant and apply derivatives to the wave function with that assumption.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba and Runei
Consider that ##e^{ix} + e^{-ix}## is equal to ##2 cos(x)## and so has no net imaginary component for all x. But a single ##e^{kix}## always has some net imaginary component (for finite ##k## and ##x##).
 
Thanks guys!

I gave it some more thought and think I nailed it down now.

I have another question now thought, but I'm going to make another thread for it.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top