QM: Does $\frac{d\psi}{dx} \rightarrow 0$ at ±infinity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter quasar987
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qm
quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
32
Is it always true that

\frac{d\psi}{dx} \rightarrow 0

(at ±infinity)? And if so, why?

I know that for a wave function to be normalizable, we must have psi-->0 at ±infinity but as far as i can see, that does not imply that the derivative will be 0. A counter-exemple of this is a decreasing "sine-like" function with an oscillation frequency inversely proportional to its amplitude. For instance

\psi(x) = A(x)sin(x/A(x))

for x>=0, and

\psi(x) = \psi(-x)

for x<0., with

A(x) = e^{-x}

This function goes to zero at ±infinity but it's derivative is wild at ±infinity.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is your example even normalizable? Anyway one intuitive way of looking at this is that since infinity isn't really a well defined position i.e. inf+1 is still inf so the derivative must be zero at inf. This is a mathematical abomination though.
 
Thx inha. I'd forgotten that my counter example had to be normalizable to be valid. Maybe there is a way to show that for psi normalizable, the derivative go to zero, thus getting rid of the abomination.

And another question of the same type: what is the reason that psi must go to zero at infinity faster than any power of x?

Is this also true of d\psi/dx? If so, I also ask why.

Thx!
 
The only reason I can think of right now is that Psi has to go to zero faster than any power of x goes to infinity is so that expectation values of x. Since the wave function has no physical meaning by itself, there is the obvious requirement that it be a function such that it is possible to perform on it the operations that result in useful physical information.

The derivatives of Psi must go to zero at infinity to calculate expectation values of momentum. Although the derivatives don't need to go to zero faster than any power of x goes to infinity for <p> calculations, it may still be true.
 
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