Potential step at a Barrier in Quantum mechanics

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the treatment of quantum mechanical barriers, specifically the case where the energy of a particle equals the potential barrier height (##E=V_0##). Participants explore the implications of setting ##C=0## in the wave function for ##x \geq 0## to prevent divergence as ##x \rightarrow +\infty##. The conversation highlights the distinction between bound states and scattering states, emphasizing that while bound states require the wave function to approach zero at infinity, scattering states can be valid under certain conditions. The normalization of scattering states is also addressed, referencing the textbook by Messiah for further clarification.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly wave functions and potential barriers.
  • Familiarity with the Schrödinger equation and its solutions for different energy states.
  • Knowledge of normalization techniques for wave functions in quantum mechanics.
  • Experience with virtual simulations of quantum systems to visualize energy levels and probabilities.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of wave functions for cases where ##E < V_0## in quantum mechanics.
  • Explore the concept of scattering states and their normalization in quantum mechanics.
  • Investigate the implications of setting constants in wave functions to avoid divergence in solutions.
  • Read the textbook by Messiah for a comprehensive understanding of scattering states and their treatment.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those specializing in quantum mechanics, as well as educators seeking to deepen their understanding of wave functions and potential barriers.

LagrangeEuler
Messages
711
Reaction score
22
In quantum mechanics in books authors discuss only cases ##E<V_0## and ##E>V_0##, where ##E## is energy of the particle and ##V_0## is height of the barrier. Why not ##E=V_0##?

In that case for ##x<0##
\psi_1(x)=Ae^{ikx}+Be^{-ikx}
and for ##x\geq 0##
\psi_2(x)=Cx+D
and then from ##\psi_1(0)=\psi_2(0)## and ##\psi_1'(0)=\psi_2'(0)## I got a system
1+\frac{B}{A}=\frac{D}{A}
ik-ik\frac{B}{A}=\frac{C}{A}
and I can not solve this. Maybe is necessary to take ##C=0##? But why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
LagrangeEuler said:
Maybe is necessary to take ##C=0##? But why?
If ##C \ne 0##, what happens to ##\psi_2(x)## as ##x \rightarrow +\infty##?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
I like to suggest people try virtual simulations in addition to going through the math. When you try the simulation at that link make sure to check the boxes for 'show energy levels' and 'show transmission and reflection probabilities'.
 
Well in that case I will not have bound state. So wave function will go to either to ##+\infty## or ##-\infty##. But why I should have bound state?
 
LagrangeEuler said:
in that case I will not have bound state. So wave function will go to either to ##- \infty## or ##\infty##.

If a wave function does not go to zero at ##- \infty## or ##\infty##, is it valid?
 
LagrangeEuler said:
But why I should have bound state?
We're not dealing with bound states here.

Did you study the derivation for ##E < V_0##? In that case, for ##x > 0##, the general solution is something like $$\psi_2(x) = Ce^{\kappa x} + De^{-\kappa x}$$ Here we must set ##C=0## so that ##\psi_2(x)## doesn't "blow up" as ##x \rightarrow +\infty##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: LagrangeEuler
PeterDonis said:
If a wave function does not go to zero at ##- \infty## or ##\infty##, is it valid?
For a scattering state it may be valid with some qualifications. The most simple case is the free particle, i.e., ##\hat{H}=\hat{p^2}/(2m)##. The energy-eigensolutions are the plane waves ##u_p(x)=N_p \exp(\mathrm{i} p x)## with eigenvalues ##E(p)=p^2/(2m)## (using natural units with ##\hbar=1##).

These are not Hilbert-space vectors though since ##|u_p|^2## is not integrable over ##x \in \mathbb{R}##, but they are generalized functions (distributions) living the in the dual of the domain of the position and momentum operators. They are "normalizable to a ##\delta## distribution", i.e.,
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} x u_{p'}^*(x) u_{p}(x)=2 \pi |N_p|^2 \delta(p-p').$$
The usual choice for the normalization constants thus is ##N_p=1/\sqrt{2 \pi}##.

This should hold true for all scattering states in problems with a potential too. Now think again about what this implies for your constant ##C##!

For a thorough discussion of how to treat the normalization of scattering states (particularly also in this one-dimensional case) look in the textbook by Messiah, who does this very carefully.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K