Numerical solution of one dimensional Schrodinger equation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the numerical solution of the one-dimensional Schrödinger equation for a scattering problem involving a specific potential function. Participants explore the behavior of the wave function and the appropriate methods for solving the equation, particularly in the context of boundary conditions and wave function components.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their approach using Numerov's method to solve the Schrödinger equation but expresses concern about the oscillating behavior of the squared wave function across the entire interval, suggesting it should be constant after the potential jump.
  • Another participant suggests that the oscillation may arise from a linear combination of incoming wave functions from both sides, proposing that eliminating the left-moving component could resolve the issue.
  • A third participant notes the presence of two wave functions on the left and one on the right, indicating a need for self-consistent determination of coefficients A, B, and C in their numerical program.
  • A follow-up comment points out that the general solution should also include a component D exp(-iqx) at the far right, questioning whether measures are taken to prevent this component from appearing in the numerical solution.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct approach to the problem. Multiple competing views regarding the wave function components and their implications for the numerical solution remain present.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the boundary conditions and the specific numerical implementation of the wave function components. The discussion highlights the complexity of ensuring the correct behavior of the wave function in the context of the potential function used.

mojtaba m
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I want to solve one dimensional Schrödinger equation for a scattering problem. The potential function is 1/ ( 1+exp(-x) ). So at -∞ it goes to 0 and at ∞ it's 1. The energy level is more than 1. I used Numerov's method and integrated it from +∞ (far enough) backwards with an initial value =1 . But I believe it's wrong b/c squared wave function is oscillating on whole interval and it's supposed to be constant after the jump in potential. I know that I'm doing somewhere wrong in my solution So I would appreciate you if you help me by this or introduce me some sources.
Thanks,
Moji
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mojtaba m said:
But I believe it's wrong b/c squared wave function is oscillating on whole interval and it's supposed to be constant after the jump in potential.

Sounds like your solution is a linear combination of a particle incoming from the left and a particle incoming from the right. Interference of ##e^{ipx}## and ##e^{-ipx}## terms would produce this oscillating behavior. Maybe you can find two solutions and take a linear combination to eliminate the left-moving component on the right side of the potential jump?
 
Actually we have two wave function A exp(ipx) and B exp(−ipx) at far left and one C exp(iqx) at far right. I need to write my program in a way which the coefficients A, B and C been determined self-consistently.
 
mojtaba m said:
Actually we have two wave function A exp(ipx) and B exp(−ipx) at far left and one C exp(iqx) at far right.

Right, but the most general solution to the Schrödinger equation also has a D exp(-iqx) component at the far right. Are you doing anything to prevent this component from appearing in your numerical solution?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K