Plane wave limit of Gaussian packet

RedX
Messages
963
Reaction score
3
\psi (x)= \frac{1}{(\pi\Delta^2)^\frac{1}{4}} e^(\frac{i<p>(x-<x>)}{\hbar})e^(\frac{-(x-<x>)^2}{2\Delta^2}) as \Delta\rightarrow\infty should approach the plane wave \frac{1}{(2\pi\hbar)^\frac{1}{2}} e^(\frac{i<p>x}{\hbar}) up to a phase factor. I guess this happens by setting the e^(\frac{-(x-<x>)^2}{2\Delta^2}) term equal to 1. However, ignoring phase factor differences, the normalization factor out front still seems to be different. One is \frac{1}{(\pi\Delta^2)^\frac{1}{4}} while the other is \frac{1}{(2\pi\hbar)^\frac{1}{2}}. Am I not seeing something?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
From where did you get that this ψ is a plane wave in the limit ∆ → ∞ ? This is clearly not the case. In that limit ψ(x) → 0 for all x. Moreover,

∫ |ψ(x)|2 dx = 1 , for all values of ∆ ,

and thus, in particular, this is so also for the limit ∆ → ∞. A plane wave must have infinite norm, not norm equal to 1.

Furthermore, why are you looking in position space? It is most unintuitive to do so.

So ... let's look in momentum space. Write

[1] |ψε> = ∫ fε(p - po) |p> dp .

This fε(p) is chosen in such a way that

[2] limε → 0+ fε(p - po) = δ(p - po) .

This means that limε → 0+ε> = |po>, a plane wave with momentum po.

In terms of a Gaussian, a suitable choice for fε(p) is

[3] fε(p - po) = (1/ε√π) exp{-(p - po)22} .
_______

Now, let's look at [1] in the position space of functions:

[4] ψε(x) ≡ <x|ψε> = ∫ fε(p - po) <x|p> dp ,

where, of course,

[5] <x|p> = 1/√(2πhbar) exp{ipx/hbar} .

The RHS of equation [4] is essentially a Fourier transform of fε(p - po). The precise result of [4], in light of [3] and [5], is

[6] ψε(x) = 1/√(2πhbar) exp{ipox/hbar} ∙ exp{-x2ε2/4hbar2} .

Clearly,

limε → 0+ ψε(x) = 1/√(2πhbar) exp{ipox/hbar} ,

as required. Also,

∫ |ψε(x)|2 dx = const ∙ (1/ε) ,

so that in the limit ε → 0+, this quantity goes to ∞ , as required.

Equation [6] is a correct rendition of the ψ(x) you originally proposed. You can now redefine ε as you wish.
 


Your understanding is correct. As the width of the Gaussian packet, represented by the parameter \Delta, approaches infinity, the exponential term in the equation for \psi(x) becomes a constant, resulting in a plane wave solution. However, there is a slight difference in the normalization factor between the two equations. This is because the normalization factor for a plane wave solution is defined in terms of the momentum, p, while the normalization factor for a Gaussian packet is defined in terms of the position and width, <x> and \Delta. The difference in these factors can be accounted for by the uncertainty principle, which states that there is a trade-off between the precision in measuring position and momentum. Therefore, as the width of the Gaussian packet approaches infinity, the uncertainty in the position decreases, resulting in a larger normalization factor for the plane wave solution. This difference in normalization factors does not affect the overall behavior of the wave function, as the phase factor is the same for both equations.
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top