Parity Operator and odd potential function.

sudipmaity
Messages
48
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



This is a university annual exam question: Show that for a potential V (-r)=-V (r) the wave function is either even or odd parity.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


We can determine whether a wavefunctions' parity is time independent based on if the parity operator commutes with the hamiltonian.As far as I know for even parity potential V (-r)=V (r), hamiltonian and parity will commute and we can show that wave function to have even or odd parity.But for odd parity potential as given by the question the hamiltonian won't commute with the parity as it no longer remains invariant under parity operation.So wavefuntion should not have even or odd parity.I talked with some friends and some of them think that there might be some printing mistake in the question. What do you guys have to say.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To help see if the problem might have a typographical error, consider the one dimensional potential V(x) shown below. Note, V(-x) = -V(x).

Imagine a particle "trapped" in the region -a < x < 0. Consider roughly what the wavefunction for the ground state would look like. Would the wavefunction be even, odd, or neither?
 

Attachments

  • junk potential well.png
    junk potential well.png
    1.4 KB · Views: 649
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