Prove E > V(min) in Schroedinger Equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter emob2p
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    General
emob2p
Messages
56
Reaction score
1
I'm trying to prove that E must exceed the minimum value of V(x) for all normalizable solutions to the Schroed. eq. To do this I am going to show that in the case E < V(min), the wave function is not normalizable. Naturally I began with the normalization condition: int(|phi|^2)=1 and started taking derivatives on this. However, I cannot arrive at a contradiction. Any thoughts? Or any other ways to show the same result? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
emob2p said:
I'm trying to prove that E must exceed the minimum value of V(x) for all normalizable solutions to the Schroed. eq. To do this I am going to show that in the case E < V(min), the wave function is not normalizable. Naturally I began with the normalization condition: int(|phi|^2)=1 and started taking derivatives on this. However, I cannot arrive at a contradiction. Any thoughts? Or any other ways to show the same result? Thanks.

this is just of the top of my head here, but you need to solve the schrödinger equation with the fact that E - V < 0. I am going to assume that you know how to solve second order differential equations so when you solve :

(-h'²/2m * f'' + V * f) = E * f (f is the wavefunction, f" is the second derivative and h' is h devided by 2 * pi)

you get : f" - (2m/h'²)*(V - E)f = 0 and the coëfficiënt (let's call this k²)of f is positive here so the solutions will be a superposition of exp(kx) and exp(-kx). So k² = (2m/h'²)(V-E) and the equation becomes f" = k²f

Now try searching for infinities : when x goes to the positive infinity one of the two exponential will become infinite and the same will occur when x goes to the negative infinite. We are not able to find a solution that is finite everywhere this this corresponds to an unphysical state...

regards
marlon
 
Last edited:
Is there a way to prove in general if a function and its second derivative are always the same sign, then the function is not normalizalbe since this is essentially the case with E < V(min)?
 
emob2p said:
Is there a way to prove in general if a function and its second derivative are always the same sign, then the function is not normalizalbe since this is essentially the case with E < V(min)?

Well,
Just plot any function f with these two properties. You will clearly see that |f| will always "grow" without limit when x goes to either the positive or negative infinity. When f and f" > 0 then f will be concave upwards and if they are negative then f will be concave downwards...just check this out...
and suppose that f is zero in some point x then this point is also zero for the second derivative meaning that the function will go from convex (under the x-axis) to concave (above the x-axis)...the switch happens in the point x

marlon
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top