Normalizing the Momentum Eigenfunctions

Domnu
Messages
176
Reaction score
0
I know that the momentum eigenfunctions are of the form \phi = Ce^{ikx}, but how would we normalize them? We just get

\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} C^2 dx = 1

which means that C is infintesimally small...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Indeed, so these wave-functions are non-normalizable. You either choose C = 0 and you have a trivial wave function, or you have a diverging integral.
 
Well, see the thing is that there's this formula in my book which I have absolutely no idea as to how they got... here it is... could someone show a proof of this?

\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{ix(k'-k)} dx = 2\pi \cdot \delta(k' - k)

It makes absolutely no sense to me... if we have that k' \neq k, then

\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{ix(k'-k)} dx = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \cos [(k'-k) x] dx

since sin is an odd function. But even this is a large step to claim... it's like saying that 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... = 0. But can we just say that cos is a sideways shift of sin, so we can just say that it evaluates to zero as well? Or do the limits mean that we take a value that approaches infinity and it always equals zero? I think I understand why the k'=k case works, however...delta(0) = infinity, which is also the lhs. Lastly, why does the 2 pi have to be on the RHS?
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top