Particle on a ring with perturbation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the perturbation theory applied to a particle on a ring subjected to a constant electric field. Participants explore the implications of adding a perturbing term to the Hamiltonian and seek to determine the first non-zero energy correction to the ground state, considering the effects of the perturbation on the eigenstates of the system.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the setup of the problem, noting that the first order energy correction vanishes due to the cosine term in the perturbation.
  • Another participant suggests that the integral involving the cosine term may not be zero for all integer values of k, proposing a different approach to evaluate it.
  • A subsequent reply agrees that the integral is not zero in general but argues that it will vanish for integer k values due to periodic boundary conditions.
  • Further clarification is provided that the integral does not vanish for k=1, and questions arise about the behavior for other integer values of k.
  • Participants discuss the implications of including negative integers in the analysis, noting that both positive and negative integers correspond to energy eigenstates of the unperturbed system.
  • There is a suggestion that the second order perturbation correction may only involve a single term, which is later corrected to indicate that two terms must be considered due to degeneracy.
  • A participant raises the issue of needing to apply the degenerate version of second order perturbation theory due to the presence of two distinct eigenfunctions with the same energy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the evaluation of the integral and the implications of integer values of k, indicating that there is no consensus on the specifics of the second order perturbation correction and its treatment.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of perturbation theory in this context, particularly regarding the treatment of degenerate states and the evaluation of integrals involving trigonometric functions.

"pi"mp
Messages
129
Reaction score
1
So I'm trying to solve old qualifying exam problems, one of which is a particle on a ring with a constant electric field perturbation. The un-perturbed problem is straightforward, and we then add a constant electric field in the x-direction (the ring lies in the xy-plane) of magnitude E. Therefore, we add [itex]-ReE \cos \phi[/itex] as a perturbing term to the Hamiltonian. R is the radius of the ring and phi is the angular coordinate on the ring.

We then ask for the first (non-zero) energy correction to the original ground state. Because of the cosine term, the first order correction vanishes, I believe, so we need to look to second order or beyond.

However, the second order correction involved a sum of terms of the form:

[tex]\langle \psi_{k} | H_{1} | \psi_{0} \rangle =\alpha \int_{0}^{2 \pi} d \phi e^{ik \phi} \cos \phi[/tex]

Unless I'm screwing up badly, I believe the above terms are also zero. So am I making a mistake here? Or am I correct and I need to look for third order corrections to get a non-zero term?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think this integral is zero for all ##k##. Write ##\cos \phi = (e^{i\phi} + e^{-i\phi})/2##.
 
No? I agree it certainly isn't zero in general, but k must be an integer thanks to the periodic boundary conditions on the un-perturbed eigenfunctions. Won't it always vanish when k is an integer? Thanks a lot.
 
Oh wait...it doesn't vanish for k=1, right? It will vanish for all other integral values of k?
 
It doesn't vanish for k=-1 as well but negative integers are out of play anyway.
 
Awesome, thank you. So the point is that the infinite sum which is, in general, required for the 2nd order perturbation correction, simply contains one term?
 
Delta² said:
It doesn't vanish for k=-1 as well but negative integers are out of play anyway.

No, you have to consider negative integers too; ##e^{ik\phi}## and ##e^{-ik\phi}## are both energy eigenstates of the unperturbed system.

"pi"mp said:
Awesome, thank you. So the point is that the infinite sum which is, in general, required for the 2nd order perturbation correction, simply contains one term?

Two terms; see above.
 
Last edited:
But since those two distinct eigenfunctions have the same energy, I would need to use the degenerate version of 2nd order perturbation?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K