Particle in infinite well which is suddenly expanded

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a particle in a one-dimensional infinite square well that is suddenly expanded from width L to 2L. The original poster seeks to determine the probability of the particle being in the nth stationary state of the expanded well, having encountered difficulties in their initial solution approach.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to evaluate an integral related to the transition between the two well states, expressing confusion over the expected versus actual results. Some participants question the differences in the wave functions due to the change in well width and suggest that the initial wave function may not be the ground state.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively discussing the integral evaluation and the implications of the differing denominators in the sine functions. Some guidance has been offered regarding substitution and transformation techniques to approach the integral, but there is no explicit consensus on the resolution of the original poster's confusion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexities involved in transitioning between quantum states in different potential wells, with participants noting the importance of the wave function's domain and behavior in the expanded well.

Phyisab****
Messages
584
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


Well I thought this problem was easy, turned in the homework and got it wrong. My prof is hard to get help from, so hopefully someone here can help me out. A particle is in a one dimensional infinite square well with walls at x=0 and x=L. At time t=0 the well is expanded to width 2L. What is the probability the particle will be in the nth stationary state of the expanded well? I bet a lot of people have seen this before apparently it's a pretty popular problem.

Homework Equations

\left\langle\Psi_{f}\left|\Psi_{i}\right\rangle = d_{n}

The Attempt at a Solution



=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{L}\int sin(\frac{n \pi x}{2 L})sin(\frac{\pi x}{L})dx

So I'm pretty sure I'm right so far, and the problem is just to evaluate the integral. I was sure the solution was

d_{n}=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} if n=2

d_{n}= 0 if n not = 2

But apparently the answer is

d_{n}= \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} if n=2
d_{n}= \frac{4}{\pi}\frac{1}{(n^{2}-4} if n is odd
d_{n}= 0 otherwise

I can plug the integral into mathematica and of course it gives me the right answer. But I have seen integrals like this hundreds of times in solving PDE's, and they always go like I first thought. What is the difference here? This is causing me a ridiculous amount of cognitive dissonance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One of the sines has a 2L in the denominator while the other has just L. That's the difference.
 
The integral is the Fourier transform of the sin(\frac{\pi x}{L}) in the new well.
From your result, I guess the initial wave function may not be the ground state of the of the old well (sin(\frac{\pi x}{L}))
or your integral use a different domain (note the integration from 0 to L is different from 0 to 2L) because the wavefunction is 0 within L to 2L
I have not tried it though.
 
kuruman said:
One of the sines has a 2L in the denominator while the other has just L. That's the difference.

I realize that. I just don't see why it makes any difference. For n=8 there might as well be a 4 in the numerator and just L in the denominator. How the heck do I explicitly evaluate this so I can prove the answer to myself?
 
If your problem is evaluating the integral, first substitute θ = πx/L and convert the sines to exponentials. Then

sin(n\theta/2)sin(\theta)=-\frac{(e^{i n\theta/2}-e^{-i n\theta/2})(e^{i \theta}-e^{-i \theta})}{4}

Multiply out the terms and you will get four integrals that look like

\int^{\pi}_0 e^{i(n/2+1)\theta}d\theta=\left[ \frac{e^{i(n/2+1)\theta}}{i(n/2+1)}\right]^{\pi}_0

or, after you multiply out the terms you should be able to recognize sines and/or cosines and integrate them.

In either case, eventually, you should be able to combine the answer to a real number and the role of the 2 in the denominator should become obvious.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
24
Views
3K