Problem with the Laguerre polynomials

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the Laguerre polynomials, specifically focusing on their derivation using power series and generating functions. Participants are exploring methods to express the first three Laguerre polynomials and the implications of normalization in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss using a power series ansatz and the Rodrigues representation for Laguerre polynomials. There are suggestions to utilize the generating function and Taylor expansion to derive the polynomials. Questions arise regarding the normalization constant and the implications of the Kronecker delta in the context of quantum mechanics.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants sharing different methods for deriving the Laguerre polynomials and questioning the normalization process. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of generating functions and the importance of normalization in quantum mechanics, but there is no explicit consensus on the overall constant needed.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the definitions and properties of Laguerre polynomials, particularly in relation to their use as an orthonormal basis in quantum mechanics. There is a mention of differing definitions from sources like Wolfram, which may affect the normalization process.

Logarythmic
Messages
277
Reaction score
0
My task is to explicitly write down the first three Laguerre polynomials by using a power series ansatz.
What should this ansatz look like? Should it be the Rodrigues representation

[tex]L_n (x) = \frac{e^x}{n!} \frac{d^n}{dx^n} x^n e^{-x}[/tex]

?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sounds to me like they either want you to solve the DE using the method of series solutions (see, e.g., Chapter 12 of Boas' Mathematical Methods for Physicists) or that they want you to generate the polynomials from a power series of the generating function (see (19) & (20) here).
 
I guess it should be the method with the generating function

[tex]g(x,z) = \frac{e^{- \frac{xz}{1-z}}}{1-z} = \sum_{n \geq 0} a_n L_n (x) z^n[/tex]

but how do I get rid of the z?
 
Taylor expand the generating function in powers of [itex]z[/itex] and the coefficients of the [itex]z^n[/itex] are the Laguerre polynomials. The additional factor of [itex]a_n[/itex] is present because Wolfram is using a definition of the Laguerre polynomials that does not include the [itex]1/n![/itex] term in your definition, so you should absorb that [itex]a_n[/itex] term into the [itex]L_n[/itex] for your purposes.
 
Yes, I got the correct answer. The second part of the exercise tells me to use the normalization

[tex]<y_n|y_m>_{e^{-x}} = \int_0^\infty e^{-x}y_n(x)y_m(x)dx = \delta_{nm}[/tex]

to determine the overall constant.

What constant?
 
The [itex]\delta_{nm}[/itex] is 1 if n=m and 0 otherwise. So if you perform that integral with n=m the result you get should be equal to one. Using this condition will allow you to determine the normalization constant for the polynomials (i.e. what you have to multiply [itex]L_n[/itex] by in order to satisfy the equation).

This Kronecker delta property is extremely important when using the Laguerre polynomials as an eigenbasis for quantum mechanical states. It allows us to think of the set of Laguerre polynomials as an orthonomal vector space which we can then use as an eigenbasis to represent wavefunctions. The integral you're computing is the dot product between the basis vectors in the Laguerre polynomial space.
 
Last edited:
Yes I'm aware of all this, but if I solve the integral I get:

For n = m = 0 and n = m = 1, I = 1.
For n = m = 2, I = 2.

Where is the overall constant in this case?
 
You should do the integral for arbitrary n and see what you get. Alternatively you can try doing it for a few more specific values of n and see if you notice a pattern.
 
Thanks for your help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K