I Particle in a box, boundary co-ordinate change

I_laff
Messages
41
Reaction score
2
If you have a particle in a 1-d box with a finite potential when ##0 < x < L ## and an infinite potential outside this region, then the normalised wavefunction used to describe said particle is ## \psi (x) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}}\sin(\frac{n\pi x}{L})##.
However, if you had say instead a finite potential when ##\frac{-L}{2} < x < \frac{L}{2}## and an infinite potential outside this region, then wouldn't the wavefunction now change?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually would the wavefunction be ##\sqrt{\frac{2}{L}}\cos(\frac{n\pi x}{L})## instead?
 
Yes, it would.
 
I_laff said:
Actually would the wavefunction be ##\sqrt{\frac{2}{L}}\cos(\frac{n\pi x}{L})## instead?
Assuming you've done the math right (I haven't checked), yes. However, this change has no physical significance because the problem is still the same square well of width ##L##. It's analogous to what happens if we decide to draw the prime meridian through something other than the Greenwich observatory - everything that is a function of longitude changes, but the surface of the Earth does not.

You can set the problem up either way, and in practice you will pick whichever way makes the algebra easiest for you.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top