Normalize function - quantum chemistry

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the normalization of the function f(r) = Nexp{-alpha*r}, where alpha is a positive constant and r is considered a vector. Participants clarify that the argument inside the exponential must be a scalar, implying that the equation should involve a scalar product, such as α·r. This distinction is crucial for proper integration and normalization of the function. The conversation emphasizes the need to correctly interpret vector and scalar quantities in quantum chemistry equations. Understanding these nuances is essential for accurate mathematical treatment in quantum mechanics.
kanciara
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Normalize function f(r) = Nexp{-alpha*r}
Where alpha is positive const and r is a vector
Relevant Equations
f(r)=N*exp{-alpha*r}
Normalize function f(r) = Nexp{-alpha*r}
Where alpha is positive const and r is a vector

I was just wondering if the fact that we have a vector value in our equation changes anything about the solution
 
Physics news on Phys.org
kanciara said:
Homework Statement:: Normalize function f(r) = Nexp{-alpha*r}
Where alpha is positive const and r is a vector
Relevant Equations:: f(r)=N*exp{-alpha*r}

Normalize function f(r) = Nexp{-alpha*r}
Where alpha is positive const and r is a vector

I was just wondering if the fact that we have a vector value in our equation changes anything about the solution
Why do you think ##r## is a vector? Make sure you're not confusing vector ##\vec r## with its magnitude ##r##.
 
kanciara said:
Homework Statement:: Normalize function f(r) = Nexp{-alpha*r}
Where alpha is positive const and r is a vector
Relevant Equations:: f(r)=N*exp{-alpha*r}

Normalize function f(r) = Nexp{-alpha*r}
Where alpha is positive const and r is a vector

I was just wondering if the fact that we have a vector value in our equation changes anything about the solution
The argument inside the exponential needs to be a scalar, so it would have to be something like ## \alpha \cdot \textbf{r}##. It should be clear by context. I've seen ##\textbf{k} \cdot \textbf{x}## in a wavefunction but never written with a radial variable.

If it is a scalar product then you will have something like
##\int N e^{ \alpha _r r + \alpha _{ \theta } \theta + \alpha _{ \phi } \phi }## (or some such) which you should be able to separate out and integrate individually.

-Dan
 
At first, I derived that: $$\nabla \frac 1{\mu}=-\frac 1{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R$$ (dot means differentiation with respect to ##t'##). I assume this result is true because it gives valid result for magnetic field. To find electric field one should also derive partial derivative of ##\vec A## with respect to ##t##. I've used chain rule, substituted ##\vec A## and used derivative of product formula. $$\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t}=\frac...