Normalization of wavefunctions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the normalization of wavefunctions in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing the differences in integration required for wavefunctions defined in three-dimensional versus one-dimensional domains. Participants explore the implications of the dimensionality of wavefunctions and the appropriate integration techniques for normalization.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about why a triple integral is required for the wavefunction ψ( r, θ, ø ) = Aexp(-r/R) while a single integral suffices for exp(imø).
  • Another participant clarifies that the integration domain corresponds to the dimensionality of the wavefunction, noting that the first case is three-dimensional and the second is one-dimensional.
  • A participant questions how to determine the dimensionality of the domain when the function is presented in a different form, such as exp(imø), which does not explicitly indicate its dimensionality.
  • Further discussion includes the need for context in problem statements to clarify whether a wavefunction should be treated as three-dimensional or one-dimensional.
  • One participant provides an analogy involving a solid sphere to illustrate the necessity of integrating over a three-dimensional volume to find mass, despite the wavefunction depending only on one variable.
  • Concerns are raised about the normalization of exp(imø) over an unrestricted three-dimensional domain, which could lead to divergence.
  • Another participant notes that the hydrogen atom is a three-dimensional object and that the wavefunction's dependence on r does not reduce its dimensionality.
  • There is a discussion about the possibility of separating the three-dimensional wavefunction into products of one-dimensional functions for normalization.
  • Participants express uncertainty about why ψ(r) requires a triple integral while R(r) is treated as a one-dimensional integral, despite both being functions of a single coordinate.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the importance of the dimensionality of the wavefunction in determining the integration required for normalization. However, there remains uncertainty and disagreement regarding the interpretation of specific cases and the context needed to clarify dimensionality.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the lack of explicit context in problem statements can lead to confusion about whether to apply triple or single integrals for normalization. There are also unresolved questions about the implications of wavefunctions that depend on a single variable in terms of their dimensionality.

dyn
Messages
774
Reaction score
63
Hi
I have been working my way through some past papers and then checking the solutions but I am confused about the following. One question asked for the normalisation constant for the following wavefunction ψ( r, θ , ø ) = Aexp(-r/R) where R is a constant. The solution requires a triple volume integral using dV=r^2sinθdrdθdø. The 2nd question asks to normalise exp(imø) but this time the integral is just done over dø from 0 to 2∏.
The 1st wavefunction only involves r but I have to do a triple integral. The 2nd only involves ø but I just need a single integral. I'm confused !
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have to integrate over the domain on which the wavefunction is defined. In your 1st case, it's a 3D domain. In the 2nd case it's a 1D domain (actually, just a circle).
 
In the first case I can see that it is a 3-D domain as the wavefunction is given as ψ ( r , θ , ø ) even though the function only depends on r. But in the 2nd case the function is just given as exp(imø) not in the form ψ ( ) so how would know if the domain is 3-D or 1-D ?
 
dyn said:
In the first case I can see that it is a 3-D domain as the wavefunction is given as ψ ( r , θ , ø ) even though the function only depends on r. But in the 2nd case the function is just given as exp(imø) not in the form ψ ( ) so how would know if the domain is 3-D or 1-D ?
If the question is well-posed, then it should be clear from the context. If it just says ##e^{im\phi}##, with no other information, then it's reasonable to assume it depends only on ##\phi##. I can't say for sure without seeing the wording (and context) of the question(s).

Also, if you try normalizing ##e^{im\phi}## over an unrestricted 3D domain, you won't get a sensible answer since the integral diverges.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
I've just done another question which asked to determine the constant A in the wavefunction
ψ ( r ) = Aexp(-r/a). The solution involved the triple integral over r ,θ , ø. But if the function is given as a function of only one variable how do I know to do the triple integral ? Whereas when given exp(imø) which again is only one variable I only do a single integral ?
 
dyn said:
I've just done another question which asked to determine the constant A in the wavefunction
ψ ( r ) = Aexp(-r/a). The solution involved the triple integral over r ,θ , ø. But if the function is given as a function of only one variable how do I know to do the triple integral ? Whereas when given exp(imø) which again is only one variable I only do a single integral ?
I can't offer any further answer without seeing the full questions. Can you post a link to them?
 
Hi,
I can't post a link to them but I will give the question as best I can.( I don't know how to post complicated equations , sorry )

The question starts by giving the time-independent Schrödinger equation for a particle in 3-D where ψ = ψ ( vector r ). The question then asks to show that for an electron in a hydrogen atom , the spherically symmetric solutions satisfy an equation which only involves the r coordinate. ( the Laplacian operator in spherical polar coordinates is given as a hint ).
The next part then asks to show that the wavefunction ψ ( scalar r ) = A exp(-r/a) is a solution to the equation I had previously calculated.
I don't understand how to know whether to do the triple or single integral as the function only involves r ; but with the exp(imø) it was only a single integral.
Sorry if I'm not making much sense.
 
A hydrogen atom is a three-dimensional object, so it is described by a three-dimensional wave function. The fact that the wave function depends only on r (for the specific state that you're dealing with) means that the probability distribution is spherically symmetric; it doesn't turn the atom into a one-dimensional object.

As a classical analogy, consider a solid sphere of uniform density. All you need to describe it is the density ρ and the radius R. But if you want to find the mass of the sphere, you need to integrate the density over a three-dimensional volume. This would give you the result M = (4/3)πR3ρ, i.e. the volume of a sphere of radius R, times the density.

As for the ##e^{im\phi}##, does the problem statement not give any context at all for it? What is it supposed to be describing? :confused:

One possibility that comes to my mind is that the three-dimensional hydrogen wave function is a product of three one-dimensional functions: ##\psi(r,\theta,\phi) = R(r)\Theta(\theta)\Phi(\phi)##. When you normalize it, the three-dimensional integral separates into a product of three one-dimensional integrals. It's possible to normalize each of them individually so the overall integral is 1·1·1 = 1.
 
  • #10
Thanks for that. The exp(imø) problem is for the eigenfunction of the z-component of angular momentum with eigenvalue mh/2∏. The normalization integral is a single integral from 0 to 2∏. I understand that this would be impossible to normalise with r ranging from 0 to ∞ but it don't understand why this is a single integral when the other ones are triple integrals.
 
  • #11
jtbell said:
A hydrogen atom is a three-dimensional object, so it is described by a three-dimensional wave function. The fact that the wave function depends only on r (for the specific state that you're dealing with) means that the probability distribution is spherically symmetric; it doesn't turn the atom into a one-dimensional object.

As a classical analogy, consider a solid sphere of uniform density. All you need to describe it is the density ρ and the radius R. But if you want to find the mass of the sphere, you need to integrate the density over a three-dimensional volume. This would give you the result M = (4/3)πR3ρ, i.e. the volume of a sphere of radius R, times the density.

As for the ##e^{im\phi}##, does the problem statement not give any context at all for it? What is it supposed to be describing? :confused:

One possibility that comes to my mind is that the three-dimensional hydrogen wave function is a product of three one-dimensional functions: ##\psi(r,\theta,\phi) = R(r)\Theta(\theta)\Phi(\phi)##. When you normalize it, the three-dimensional integral separates into a product of three one-dimensional integrals. It's possible to normalize each of them individually so the overall integral is 1·1·1 = 1.

The ##e^{im\phi}## I mentioned is the ##\Phi(\phi) you mention above so as you say it would only involve a 1-D integral so would the R(r) integral. But there lies my confusion ! Both ψ (r) and R(r) are functions of a single coordinate but the ψ (r ) is a 3-D integral and R(r) is a 1-D integral
 
  • #12
Sorry the above post didn't come out right. I was trying LateX for the first time. Only got it half right !
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 128 ·
5
Replies
128
Views
14K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K