Normalization Conditions of Wave functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the normalization conditions of wave functions in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing whether the derivative of a wave function must approach zero as the variable approaches infinity. Participants explore implications of square-integrability, continuity, and bounded derivatives in relation to the behavior of wave functions at infinity.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the condition \(\lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} = 0\) is necessary, providing a counterexample of a normalizable wave function whose derivative does not approach zero.
  • Another participant notes that physicists often assert that wave functions must approach zero at infinity, but this is not universally true and requires additional assumptions beyond square-integrability.
  • It is suggested that if a wave function is square-integrable, continuous, and has bounded first derivatives, then it may be possible to prove that it approaches zero at infinity.
  • A counterexample is provided where a wave function does not go to zero at infinity but is still normalizable, highlighting the distinction between mathematical validity and physical reasoning.
  • One participant reflects on the implications of bounded potential energy at infinity, suggesting that if the wave function behaves in a certain way, it may lead to the conclusion that \(\lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial x} = 0\) as well.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the necessity of the condition that the derivative of a wave function approaches zero at infinity. Multiple competing views on the implications of normalization and the behavior of wave functions at infinity remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the discussion involves assumptions about continuity and differentiability of wave functions, as well as the implications of bounded derivatives, which are not universally accepted or established in the context of quantum mechanics.

fscman
Messages
8
Reaction score
1
I am currently reading through Griffiths Quantum Mechanics textbook, and on page 14, Griffiths proves that
\frac{d}{dt}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |\Psi(x,t)|^2 \, dx = \left.\frac{i \hbar}{2m}\left( \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial \Psi^*}{\partial x} \Psi \right) \right|_{-\infty}^{\infty}
and he claims that the right hand side evaluates to zero since \Psi must be normalizable and hence \lim_{x \to \infty} \Psi(x,t) = 0.
My question is whether \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} must also equal zero. I ask this because:

Suppose we take the function \Psi (x,t)=\frac{1}{x} \sin(x^9). Then, we can calculate \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Psi^2 \, dx = 1.14... so \Psi IS normalizable. We can find that \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}=\frac{1}{x^2}\left(9x^9 \cos(x^9)-\sin(x^9)\right)=9x^7 \cos(x^9)-\frac{\sin(x^9)}{x^2},
so if we take \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}=9 x^6 \sin(x^9) \cos (x^9) - \frac{\sin^2(x^9)}{x^3}, we find that this expression does not approach 0 as x approaches infinity (which renders Griffiths' argument using the fact \lim_{x \to \infty} \Psi(x,t) = 0 to explain why the original integral false; there are functions that tend to zero as x approaches infinity but the derivative can grow arbitrarily large). Of course, in this case, \left.\frac{i \hbar}{2m}\left( \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial \Psi^*}{\partial x} \Psi \right) \right|_{-\infty}^{\infty} happens to vanish since \Psi^*=\Psi, but if we choose some general complex function, then I would guess that \left.\frac{i \hbar}{2m}\left( \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial \Psi^*}{\partial x} \Psi \right) \right|_{-\infty}^{\infty} might not vanish if we do not set \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} equal to zero. However, I have never seen this condition in quantum mechanics textbooks. Is there something wrong with my analysis, or is \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}=0 an implicit assumption physicists make? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't have a complete answer, just a few observations.
  • Physicists are really sloppy with these things, so they'll say that ##\psi## must go to 0, even though it may not be true.
  • As you have noted, it isn't true. To prove that ##\psi\to 0##, you will need other assumptions than than square-integrability.
  • We are also assuming that ##\psi## is a solution of the Schrödinger equation. So ##\psi## is differentiable, and therefore continuous.
  • The right-hand side you're working with is 0 if ##\psi\to 0## and ##\partial\psi/\partial x## is bounded.
I suspect that it's possible to prove that if ##\psi## is square-integrable, continuous and has bounded first derivatives, then ##\psi\to 0##. I also suspect that there's something very "unphysical" about wavefunctions with unbounded partial derivatives. I expect them to have infinite energy or something like that.
 
You are right!

Physicists sometimes believe that normalization of a wave function requires that it approaches zero at infinity, i.e. lim x→±∞ ψ(x) = 0. This assumption is wrong - there are well-known counter examples. e.g.:

ψ(x) = 1 for x in [n,n+1/n2] for all integers n
ψ(x) = 0 elsewhere

lim x→±∞ ψ(x) does not exist, but of course the infinite sum for the normalization converges which means that ψ(x) is normalizable. You can even construct wave functions with increasing height of the peaks for x→±∞

You may exclude those wave functions based on "physical reasoning" but in pure maths i.e. for the L2 Hilbert space they are perfectly valid.
 
Here's a nice example of a continuous square-integrable function that doesn't go to zero as the variable goes to infinity, from this article.

attachment.php?attachmentid=42567&d=1326093702.png
 

Attachments

  • counterexample.png
    counterexample.png
    5.6 KB · Views: 1,561
Thanks for your replies! I will look more into the mathematical side of L2 spaces and read the article. I believe the "physical reality" argument for why ψ approaches 0 as x approaches infinity, and I just realized that from the time independent Schrödinger equation, if we require the potential energy to be bounded at infinity, then \frac{\partial^2 \Phi}{\partial x^2} must approach 0 as x approaches infinity if the original function ψ behaves that way. Then, by mathematical arguments involving the mean value theorem, I believe that implies \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial x}=0 also.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Philethan

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
583
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
939
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K