Multiplying a wavefunction by a constant number

  • I
  • Thread starter dyn
  • Start date
  • #1
dyn
622
32
Hi.
Is the wavefunction for x≤0 , ψ(x) = sinkx - acoskx equivalent to ψ(x) = -sinkx - acoskx where a is a constant ?
Thanks
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
34,987
11,174
No, and you didn't multiply ψ by a constant number to get the second expression.
 
  • #3
How to multiply wavefunction with a constant ? Could anyone please tell...thanks
 
  • #4
34,987
11,174
Write cψ instead of ψ. There, you multiplied ψ by a constant c.
 
  • Like
Likes Aditya77777
  • #5
Thank you could you give an example? Thanks
 
  • #6
34,987
11,174
I just gave you an example. Please don’t derail this thread with your own questions, better start a new one.
 
  • #7
dyn
622
32
Just so I make sure I understand this properly and I will use kets instead please tell me which of the following examples are equivalent to the ket
| u > + | v >

1. a ( | u > + | v > ) where a is any number ( real or complex)
2. | u > + ( a | v > )
3 . e-ix ( | u > + | v > )
4. | u > + ( e-ix | v > )
 
  • #8
34,987
11,174
They are all different, but the first one is proportional to the initial one. For the third one it depends on what x is. If it refers to a spatial variable then it is not constant, if it is just some constant it is constant.
 
  • #9
dyn
622
32
Thanks. Regarding the 1st example if it is proportional to the initial example is it not considered an equivalent wavefunction ?
My confusion arises because I have come across the following statement " multiplying a wavefunction by a constant number or a phase doesn't change the wavefunction"
 
  • #10
PeterDonis
Mentor
Insights Author
2019 Award
31,718
10,441
I have come across the following statement " multiplying a wavefunction by a constant number or a phase doesn't change the wavefunction"
Where did you come across this statement? Can you give a specific reference?
 
  • #11
dyn
622
32
The exact statement in some lecture notes from MIT is " ψ and αψ represent the same physics for any complex number α different from zero , so
| A > ≅ 2 | A > ≅ i | A > ≅ - | A > where ≅ represents physical equivalence "
 
  • #12
34,987
11,174
It leads to the same predictions for observable events if you take care of normalization.
 
  • Like
Likes dyn
  • #13
Khashishi
Science Advisor
2,815
493
Is the wavefunction for x≤0 , ψ(x) = sinkx - acoskx equivalent to ψ(x) = -sinkx - acoskx where a is a constant ?
Perhaps you meant: ψ(x) = sinkx - acoskx equivalent to ψ(x) = -sinkx + acoskx
(negative negative = plus)

If you change the overall scaling and phase of everything in the whole system equally, it makes no difference to the system. But if you change the phase of one wavefunction with respect to another wavefunction, this will change the system.
 
  • Like
Likes dyn

Related Threads on Multiplying a wavefunction by a constant number

Replies
7
Views
892
Replies
9
Views
278
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
2K
Top