Perturbation Theory: Square Well & Energy Levels

latentcorpse
Messages
1,411
Reaction score
0
a particle moves in one dimension in the potential

V(x)=\infty \forall |x|>a, V(x)=V_0 \cos{\frac{\pi x}{2a}} \forall |x| \leq a

now the unperturbed state that i use is just a standard infinite square well.

anyway the solution says that perturbation theory is only valid provided that the energy scale of the "bump" (set by V_0) is less than the difference in energy between square well states.
Q1: is this just a fact: perturbation theory is only applicable providing the perturbation is less than the energy difference of the states of teh unperturbed system?

it then explains the above mathematically by saying:

V_0 << \frac{{\hbar}^2 \pi^2}{8ma^2}(2n-1)
i can't for the life of me see where the RHS of that comes from. arent the energy levels dependent on n^2 and not n?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i think if you look at the difference in energy is given by
n^2- (n-1)^2 = n^2 - (n^2 - 2n+1) = 2n-1

i think less than is probably not strong enough, i think the perturbation has to be "small" relative to the energy difference. Looking in Ballentine, this can be seen if you look at the first order contribution to the eigenvector. It effectively contains the ratio of the perturbation to the energy level difference. Higher order terms carry the ratio at higher powers, so for the perturbation sum to converge (and quickly) the ratio must be small
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top