[Q]How can i draw real graph from complex function?

good_phy
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
For instance,

I have a simple eigen function such as \varphi = Ae^{ik_{1}x} + Be^{-ik_{1}x}

This is complex form which means we can't draw this function on real coordinate.

How can i draw this function? just By taking out real term of complex function?


Second question is what does transmission coefficient means. What exactly i want to know

is how to know amplitude of transmission wave from transmission coefficient in potential

barrier problem? For instance, in problem such that x < a, v = 0 and x >= a, v = c,

Transmission coefficient T = |\frac{C}{A}|^2\frac{k_2}{k_1}

But This expression contains absolute value of ratio A to C, So I'm not sure that This

expression indicate real transmission amplitute C when we know Incident amplitute A.

More over, I'm confusion that whether amplitute of wave can be complex number.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You know that you can write that function in terms of cos and sine right? i.e that wavefunction is a sinosodial one with one term propagating to the right and one propagating to the left.

You must match the inner solution with the outer solution so that the wavefuntion is continuous and has continuous derivative at the boundary. Very standard exercise in intro QM.
 
In addition, you could plot 3D graph as follows: let the x coordinate be the real part of the input, let the y coordinate be the complex part of the input, and let z be the magnitude of the output. You can change this around to get the complex part of the output, etc.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top