Proving E must exceed the min potential

  • Thread starter Thread starter emob2p
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Potential
AI Thread Summary
To prove that the energy E must exceed the minimum potential V(x) for all normalizable solutions to the Schrödinger equation, start with the time-independent Schrödinger equation Hφ = Eφ, where H includes the kinetic and potential energy terms. By multiplying both sides by the complex conjugate of the wavefunction, φ*, and utilizing the properties of the momentum operator, a contradiction can be shown if E is less than the minimum of V. Specifically, if E < V, the wavefunction's second derivative will indicate a local minimum, leading to non-normalizable solutions as the wavefunction approaches infinity. Thus, for normalizable solutions, E must indeed be greater than the minimum potential. This reasoning confirms the requirement for E to exceed V(x).
emob2p
Messages
56
Reaction score
1
I've come across Problem 2.2 out of Griffiths' Intro to Quantum book second edition. The problem says to show that E must exceed the minimum value of V(x) for all normalizable solutions to the Schroed. eq. Naturally I started 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
hi, emob2p.

I think I would start from the time independent schroedinger equation, H\phi=E\phi, where H is the Hamiltonian, \phi the wavefunction. Normally, H=p^2/(2m)+V(x), where p is the momentum operator. First multiply both sides with \phi^{*}, then note that p is hermitian (and the \phi^{*}p^{2}\phi term can be made into the square of modulus of a function), and then compare both sides. You may arrive at a contradiction if E is smaller than the minimum of V.
 
Last edited:
Here's my reasoning. Solve for ψ'' as Griffiths suggests. Now notice that if E<V, then ψ>0 and ψ''>0, or ψ<0 and ψ''<0. From calculus recall that if the second derivative is positive, then you have a local minimum. Therefore as x→∞ so does ψ→∞. In order to be normalizable, ψ must go to 0. So V must be greater than E so that ψ'' and ψ have different signs.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top