Normalizable States in QM: Bound vs. Scattering

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter asdf60
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    States
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of normalizable states in quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on the distinction between bound states and scattering states in relation to various potentials. Participants explore the implications of normalizability and the existence of these states across different potential scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that bound states correspond to normalizable solutions of the time-independent Schrödinger equation, while scattering states do not necessarily have this property.
  • Another participant argues that normalizability is synonymous with being bound, suggesting that bound states imply the particle can be located within a finite region, even if that region is infinite.
  • It is noted that not all potentials yield scattering states, with examples such as the infinite square well and the simple harmonic oscillator only producing bound states.
  • A participant raises the question of whether there exists a nontrivial potential that yields only scattering states, expressing uncertainty about this possibility.
  • One participant humorously acknowledges the age of the original question but expresses hope that their contribution may still be useful to future readers.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between normalizability and bound states, with some agreeing on certain points while others raise questions about the existence of potentials that yield only scattering states. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the completeness of the potential scenarios presented.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific definitions of potentials and the nature of bound versus scattering states, which may not be universally applicable across all contexts.

asdf60
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
I'm kind of self studying from Griffiths's QM book, and I'd like to clarify a few things I find confusing.
As I understand it, for any potential V, there can exist bound states or scattering states. In the case of the bound states, the solutions to the time-independent Schrödinger equation are normalizable, whereas with scattering states they are not. Is this true for all potentials? Why is that true?
Anyway, in that case, you can immediately reject the solutions which are not normalizable for the bounded states, since they do not represent physical states. But for the scattering states, there is no reason to throw out the non normalizable solutions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Normalizing is equivalent to being "bound". All being bound means is that you can find the particle within a definite region in space (even if that region is infinite like in the case of the single bound state for the Dirac potential). But remembering that the squared wavefunction gives the probability density for the particle reveals that this is just the same as having a function whose squared integral returns a finite value.

Also not every potential has scattering states. For instance, the infinite square well and the simple harmonic oscillator potentials only yield bound states (note that the potential goes to infinity at ##x=\pm \infty## in both these examples). Not every potential has bound states either. A trivial example is ##V(x) = a## where "a" is a constant i.e. the free particle solution. I'm actually not sure though if there is a nontrivial potential that only yields scattering states (or some weird mathematical function equivalent to the trivial case such as the indicator function on the set of rationals).
 
Gfunction said:
Normalizing is equivalent to being "bound". All being bound means is that you can find the particle within a definite region in space (even if that region is infinite like in the case of the single bound state for the Dirac potential). But remembering that the squared wavefunction gives the probability density for the particle reveals that this is just the same as having a function whose squared integral returns a finite value.

Also not every potential has scattering states. For instance, the infinite square well and the simple harmonic oscillator potentials only yield bound states (note that the potential goes to infinity at ##x=\pm \infty## in both these examples). Not every potential has bound states either. A trivial example is ##V(x) = a## where "a" is a constant i.e. the free particle solution. I'm actually not sure though if there is a nontrivial potential that only yields scattering states (or some weird mathematical function equivalent to the trivial case such as the indicator function on the set of rationals).

Maybe you're 11 years too late with that answer!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Gfunction
PeroK said:
Maybe you're 11 years too late with that answer!

Yeah, I'm new here and saw a question that I actually knew something about. I didn't realize how old it was. Who knows, maybe someone will have a similar question 11 years from now and my response will help them out.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
Thanks for the answer. We will now close the thread.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
12K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K