Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Particle in a box - Momentum and Energy

  1. Mar 13, 2015 #1
    Hi,

    I have a problem understanding the particle in a box (V=0 inside, V=∞ outside), how is it possible that momentum can vary continuously while the energy spectrum is discrete? Aren't they related by E=p2/2m? What I am missing? Thanks!
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 13, 2015 #2
    This is one of the key "weirdnesses" of quantum mechanics. When we build a Hamiltonian to specify a system, we take a classical standpoint - the formula [itex]E=\frac{p^2}{2m}[/itex] is inherently classical since [tex]p=mv\implies\frac{p^2}{2m}=\frac{m^2v^2}{2m} = \frac{1}{2}mv^2 = E_{free}.[/tex] Indeed, for a free quantum particle the energy spectrum is continuous, since the Hamiltonian is an analytic function of momentum and thus has the same eigenstates with different eigenvalues.

    However, the Hamiltonian for a particle in a box [tex]\mathcal H = \begin{cases}\frac{p^2}{2m}&\text{if }0\leq x\leq L\\\infty&\text{otherwise}\end{cases}[/tex] is definitely NOT an analytic function of momentum. When this happens, the theorem that the eigenstates are the same is no longer applicable, and thus you get no more guarantee that the quantum energy levels will be the same as the classical ones. In particular, a continuous spectrum versus a discrete one is then possible.

    Another example: the Hamiltonian for a harmonic oscillator is [tex]\mathcal H = \frac{p^2+(m\omega x)^2}{2m}.[/tex] This is a function of both the momentum and position operators, and thus is not purely an analytic function of either. This implies the same (lack of) results about eigenstates as above.
     
  4. Mar 13, 2015 #3

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    It is actually even worse, the momentum eigenstates are not even part of the appropriate Hilbert space that describes the particle in the box. As such, momentum cannot be measured without changing the system itself.

    If you instead take a finite potential well, you will soon realise that the Hamiltonian and the momentum operators do not commute and as a result there is no common set of eigenstates.
     
  5. Mar 13, 2015 #4

    Simon Bridge

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    The classical relationship between energy and momentum is an emergent property of the quantum statistics - it is not absolute.
    The relation you are missing is: <E> = <p>2/2m where <X> indicates the expectation value of X.
     
  6. Mar 13, 2015 #5

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    This is simply wrong, <p> = 0 for all eigenstates of the Hamiltonian in the case of the infinite potential well. Since H = p^2/(2m) + V, it follows that <E> = <p^2>/(2m) + <V>. For all states of the infinite potential well, <V> = 0, so <E> = <p^2>/(2m).
     
  7. Mar 13, 2015 #6

    Simon Bridge

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Oh typo ... <p^2>/2m, thanks.
     
  8. Mar 13, 2015 #7

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    As is required by the symmetry of the system. In a stationary state, the system must spend as much time with p to the left as p to the right, so <p>=0.
     
  9. Mar 14, 2015 #8
    I think that my question is wrong, the momentum is quantized actually.

    En=n2π2ħ2/2mL2
    Pn2=2mEn=2mn2π2ħ2/2mL2
    Pn=±nπħ/L
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2015
  10. Mar 14, 2015 #9

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    To state it even more drastically: There is no such thing as momentum for a particle in a finite potential pot with infinitely large wells. It simply doesn't make sense. There is of course a complete set of energy eigenvectors, and the energy spectrum is entirely discrete.

    In reality, there's of course no such thing as infinitely high potential wells. It's just a simplified model system for a particle in a very deep potential well.
     
  11. Mar 14, 2015 #10

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    The +/- there doesn't bother you? It should.
     
  12. Mar 14, 2015 #11

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    I suggest reading posts #3 and #9 above.
     
  13. Mar 14, 2015 #12

    jtbell

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

  14. Mar 14, 2015 #13

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    Again, there is no momentum operator and thus no momentum eigenfunctions. There are eigenfunctions and eigenvalues for the Hamiltonian:
    $$-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} u_E''(x)=E u_E(x).$$
    This has to be solved with the boundary conditions ##u_E(\pm L/2)=0##. The solutions are of the form
    $$u_E(x)=A \sin(k x), \quad u_E(x)=A \cos(k x).$$
    The boundary conditions lead to
    $$k L/2=n \pi, \quad k L/2=(2n+1) \pi/2,$$
    or
    $$k_j=\frac{j \pi}{L}, \quad j \in \mathbb{N}=\{1,2,3,\ldots \}.$$
    The energy eigenvalues are
    $$E_j=\frac{\hbar^2 k_j^2}{2m}.$$
    The eigenfunctions are
    $$u_j(x)=A \begin{cases}
    \cos(k_j x) \quad \text{for} \quad j=2n+1, \quad n \in \{0,1,\ldots\},\\
    \sin(k_j x) \quad \text{for} \quad j=2n, \quad n \in \{1,2,\ldots \}.
    \end{cases}$$
    Note that these are NOT eigenfunctions of the would-be momentum operator, ##-\mathrm{i} \hbar \mathrm{d}_x##.
     
  15. Mar 14, 2015 #14
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2015
  16. Mar 14, 2015 #15

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    It's talking about the mean momentum, not about what you would get when you measure p. If you go to that page and up a bit, it will say "Thus latex.png is not an eigenfunction of momentum, since the momentum operator doesn’t yield the original wave function multiplied by a constant."

    The +/- should have been a clue. If I am in an Eigenstate of energy, and E and p commute, I should have one and only one value of momentum. This means I have at least two. So E and p don't commute, and I am not in a momentum eigenstate.
     
  17. Mar 14, 2015 #16

    jtbell

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    This is wrong. If this were true, then the momentum space wave function for the n'th energy eigenstate would be basically a pair of Dirac delta functions, with the "spikes" at ##p = \pm n \pi \hbar / a##. This is clearly not true for the n = 1 and n = 2 states, whose graphs are on the page that I linked to. Those graphs use the variable ##\rho = pa/\hbar##, so the "spikes" on those graphs would be at ##\rho = \pm n\pi##.

    Note that the graph for n = 2 does have maxima at or near ##\rho = \pm 2\pi##. I once did graphs for some higher values of n, which illustrated that the peaks become sharper as n increases.

    A sinusoidal wave function corresponds to an exact value of p only if it extends to infinity in both directions. A sinusoidal wave function that is "chopped off" to zero at the sides of the well, corresponds to a sum (actually an integral: a Fourier integral) of infinitely many infinitely-long waves with different wavelengths and momenta. These waves have amplitudes such that they add up to zero outside the well.
     
  18. Mar 14, 2015 #17
    OK, it's an eigenfunction of p2, isn't it?

    ψn=(√2/a) sin (nπx/a)
    (d2/dx2) sin (nπx/a) = -(nπ/a)2 sin (nπx/a)
    p2ψn=-(iħ)2 (nπ/a)2ψn=(nπħ/a)2ψn
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2015
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Particle in a box - Momentum and Energy
  1. Particle in Box (Replies: 3)

  2. Particle in a box (Replies: 3)

Loading...