Particle in Box: Zero Probability Density at Certain Points

  • Thread starter Thread starter somebody-nobody
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Box Particle
somebody-nobody
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
The probability density at certain points for a particle in a box is zero.Does this imply that the particle cannot move across these points
 
Physics news on Phys.org
somebody-nobody said:
The probability density at certain points for a particle in a box is zero.Does this imply that the particle cannot move across these points

No, because by saying that, you are assuming that you CAN track the particle's trajectory every step of the way. All the probability density says is that when you make a measurement, the probability of finding the particle at the nodes is zero.

Zz.
 
somebody-nobody said:
The probability density at certain points for a particle in a box is zero.Does this imply that the particle cannot move across these points

Like ZapperZ said, the probability density merely defines where you can find the particle when you measure. To figure out if a particle will ever move in a spot of "zero", you should use the schrodinger equation.
 
ZapperZ said:
No, because by saying that, you are assuming that you CAN track the particle's trajectory every step of the way. All the probability density says is that when you make a measurement, the probability of finding the particle at the nodes is zero.

Zz.
Yep. The proplem is with the question itself. The OP used the term move, which is a classical idea and not a quantum one. The question is better asked regarding what the probability of finding the particle in this region and then ask what the probability of measuring the particle in this other region after the first measurement was made. If the state is an eigenstate (stationary state) the the probability density will remain constant. But we really don't speak of measuring a particle in a region of zero width (i.e. what's the probability of finding the particle at x = 2?) because that will always be zero.

Pete
 
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
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...
Thread 'Lesser Green's function'
The lesser Green's function is defined as: $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\langle C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\rangle=i\bra{n}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\ket{n}$$ where ##\ket{n}## is the many particle ground state. $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{n}e^{iHt'}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(0)e^{-iHt'}e^{iHt}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ First consider the case t <t' Define, $$\ket{\alpha}=e^{-iH(t'-t)}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ $$\ket{\beta}=C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt'}\ket{n}$$ $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{\beta}\ket{\alpha}$$ ##\ket{\alpha}##...
Back
Top