What is the best estimate for the penetration distance in quantum mechanics?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The penetration distance in quantum mechanics for a particle crossing a potential barrier is defined as 1/K, where K is calculated using the formula K = (2m(V1-E))^0.5/hbar. This estimate is based on the wavefunction's behavior, which decreases exponentially with distance, and is determined by the length scale set by K. The penetration depth is proportional to K, and while variations such as including factors like ln(2) or π are permissible, they do not alter the fundamental relationship. The probability distribution can be expressed as P = e^{-2κx}, illustrating the decay of the wavefunction in relation to the penetration distance.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly wavefunctions.
  • Familiarity with potential barriers and energy levels in quantum systems.
  • Knowledge of the mathematical formulation involving Planck's constant (hbar) and mass (m).
  • Ability to interpret exponential decay functions and probability distributions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the wavefunction in quantum mechanics, focusing on potential barriers.
  • Learn about the implications of the Schrödinger equation in quantum tunneling scenarios.
  • Explore the concept of probability density and its relation to wavefunctions in quantum systems.
  • Investigate the role of different constants in quantum mechanics, such as Planck's constant and mass.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those specializing in quantum mechanics, as well as researchers exploring quantum tunneling and potential barriers in particle physics.

sachi
Messages
63
Reaction score
1
We have a particle of energy E crossing a potential jump at x=0. for x<=0, V=0, for x>=0 V=V1
We get a wavefunction for x>=0 psi(x) = exp(-iEt/hbar)*exp(-Kx)
where K = (2m(V1-E))^0.5/hbar
N.b E<V1 so classically we get no transmission

we are asked to estimate the penetration distance, and I have found a solution which says let the penetration distance equal 1/K. I can't see physically why we would pick this (it just seems like a random number that means that the wavefunction will decrease by a factor 1/e, but I can't see why this is a sensible estimate).

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, [tex]1/\kappa[/tex] is the only relevant length scale in the problem, so the penetration depth has to be proportional to it. The point is that if you were to plot the wavefunction as a function of [tex]\kappa x[/tex], it would look the same no matter what the energy or barrier height were. In other words, if [tex]\kappa x < .1[/tex] nothing much happens and if [tex]\kappa x > 10[/tex] the wavefunction is essentially zero. Clearly, [tex]\kappa[/tex] determines the length scale over which the action happens. That being said, you have some freedom in your estimate. Maybe you would like to include a factor of [tex]\ln{2}[/tex] so you get the place where the wavefunction is one half its value at the boundary. In some other problem, it might be nice to include a factor of [tex]\pi[/tex] for convenience, for example. The convention is basically that anything within a power of ten of [tex]\kappa[/tex] is pretty much ok, but this isn't any kind of formal rule and people tend to go with the simple estimate. All you are really doing is identifying the length scale.
 
Last edited:
Consider what the probability distribution looks like.

[tex]\Psi = e^{\frac{-iE}{\hbar}t}e^{-\kappa x}[/tex]
[tex]P=\Psi^* \Psi = e^{-2\kappa x}[/tex]

Remember that the second part is completely real since V1>E.

As Physics Monkey said, this is a question of length scale. No matter what threshold of probability you choose (say, .1%), you must scale it must be a constant times 1/kappa because kappa can vary depending on what problem you're doing.

Let [tex]x=\frac{d}{\kappa}[/tex] be your chosen penetration distance, where d is just a constant.
[tex]P= e^{-2\kappa x}= e^{-2\kappa \frac{d}{\kappa}} = e^{-2d}[/tex]

Then choose d according to how close you want the probability to be zero. Since this doesn't depend on kappa, it won't matter what E and V1 are in your problem.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K