Numerially integrate the radial schrodinger equation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on numerically integrating the time-dependent Schrödinger equation in two dimensions, specifically addressing the challenges posed by the radial potential term 1/r ∂_r, which diverges near the origin. Participants suggest defining a cut-off radius to manage the divergence and recommend using a substitution of the wavefunction, psi(r) = u(r)/r, to simplify the problem. Techniques such as calculating the integral from a cut-off to infinity and employing Richardson extrapolation are also discussed as potential solutions to improve numerical stability.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation
  • Familiarity with numerical integration techniques
  • Knowledge of polar coordinates and the Laplacian operator
  • Experience with convergence criteria in numerical methods
NEXT STEPS
  • Research methods for handling singularities in numerical integration
  • Learn about Richardson extrapolation for improving numerical accuracy
  • Explore the analytical solutions of the Schrödinger equation for hydrogen-like atoms
  • Study numerical techniques for solving partial differential equations in polar coordinates
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and computational scientists working on quantum mechanics, particularly those involved in numerical simulations of wave functions in two-dimensional systems.

wdlang
Messages
306
Reaction score
0
i now need to integrate the time-dependent Schrödinger equation in 2D

the potential is rotationally invariant and so is the initial wave function

thus the symmetry of the initial wave function will be preserved in time

Instead of a 2D equation, i now only need to integrate a 1d equation about the radial part of the wave function.

However, in doing so i encounter some difficulties. There are terms like 1/r \partial_r in the equation.

near the origin, this term will diverge!

I guess this is a well-solved problem. Could anyone give me some help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
(Why'd this get moved here, of all places? It's a math problem. Numerical methods, really.)

I guess this is a well-solved problem. Could anyone give me some help?

Well, more of an ill-conditioned problem, really. :)
I'm not at all a numerics expert, but the simplest (but surely not most efficient) numerical method that comes to mind would be to calculate the integral from h to infinity and shrink h until you're within convergence limits. You could also use Richardson extrapolation to improve on that.
 
wdlang,

The 1/r potential term is best handled by recognizing that the value from the analytical solution at r = 0 for the hydrogen atom is 1. You should try to define a cut-off radius, which inside this radius the wavefuntion takes on the above value. Also, be careful of your radius step-size: use a small enough step size so your solution doesn't blow up.
 
Modey3 said:
wdlang,

The 1/r potential term is best handled by recognizing that the value from the analytical solution at r = 0 for the hydrogen atom is 1. You should try to define a cut-off radius, which inside this radius the wavefuntion takes on the above value. Also, be careful of your radius step-size: use a small enough step size so your solution doesn't blow up.

Thanks a lot!

but I do not mean the 1/r potential

i mean the lapalace operator in polar coordinates, 2D

you will find a term 1/r(d/dr)

This term diverge near the origin.

I do not know how to handle it. Moreover, i am interested in the time-dependent S equation, not the time-independent S equation.
 
I recommend you take the unknown wavefunction psi(r) and replace it with u(r)/r. Substitute psi = u / r into your equation and you will hopefully find a less ill-conditioned problem for u.
 
confinement said:
I recommend you take the unknown wavefunction psi(r) and replace it with u(r)/r. Substitute psi = u / r into your equation and you will hopefully find a less ill-conditioned problem for u.

Yes, but that works for 3D

I am concerned with the 2D case.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K