Quantum Harmonic Oscillator, what is #E_0#?

damarkk
Messages
11
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Harmonic Oscillator in 2D
Relevant Equations
##H_0 = \hbar \omega a^{\dagger}a##
Hello to everyone. I'm sorry for the foolish question.

The text is
An harmonic oscillator in two dimension isothropic of masses m and frequency ##\omega## is described by hamiltonian

H0=hbarωax†ax+ℏωay†ay

and there is a perturbation described by ##H'=\alpha x y##.

1. Find the energy for the first three eigenstates (fundamental, first and second excitated states) for non-perturbed oscillator and compute their degeneration.

My attempt.
=
There are one fundamental state ## |0_x 0_y \rangle## with energy ##E_0=E_{0x}+E_{0y}=\frac{\hbar \omega}{2}+\frac{\hbar \omega}{2}=\hbar \omega ##.

The first level has ##E_1 = 2\hbar \omega## and degeneration equal to two because the correspondent states are ##|0_x 1_y \rangle##, ##|1_x 0_y \rangle##.

The second level has ##E_2 = 3\hbar \omega## energyn and degeneration equal to three. The correspondent states are ##|2_x \0_y \rangle##, ##|1_x \1_y \rangle##, ##|0_x \2_y \rangle##.

My question is: through Schrödinger Equation for eigenstates, ##H_0 |n_x n_y \rangle = E_0|n_x n_y \rangle = \hbar \omega (n_x+n_y+1) |n_x n_y \rangle##.
But for fundamental states ##n_x = n_y = 0 ## in this hamiltonian formula, because is without ##1/2## term on x and y segment. Is then ##E_0 = 0##? I find this strange, becuase fundamental level has of course a physical energy. Of course we have to ##E_0 = \hbar \omega##, but where are the addendum ##+1## in this hamiltonian?

This is not error in exercise text.


P.S.
I'm sorry but I don't understand why Latex is not formatted.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
damarkk said:
Homework Statement: Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Harmonic Oscillator in 2D
Relevant Equations: ##H_0 = \hbar \omega a^{\dagger}a##

I'm sorry but I don't understand why Latex is not formatted.
I tried to fix it up for you. Use double-# delimiters for in-line LaTeX here at PF, and double-$ delimiters for stand-alone lines of LaTeX. See the LaTeX Guide link below the Edit window.
 
berkeman said:
I tried to fix it up for you. Use double-# delimiters for in-line LaTeX here at PF, and double-$ delimiters for stand-alone lines of LaTeX. See the LaTeX Guide link below the Edit window.
Thank you, sir. Sorry for this mistaken.
 
If you shift the energy by a constant amount, does it matter?
 
It doesn't matter obviously. But this is not my question.
If you have hamiltonian like ##H = \hbar \omega N_x +\hbar \omega N_y## and if ##N_x |n_x n_y \rangle = n_x |n_x n_y \rangle##, ##N_y |n_x n_y \rangle = n_y |n_x n_y \rangle##, then ##H |n_x n_y \rangle = \hbar \omega (n_x + n_y) |n_x n_y \rangle = 0## if ##|n_x n_y \rangle = |0_x 0_y \rangle##.

And this is my point: if ##H |0_x 0_y \rangle = 0##, how I can say that ##E_0 = \hbar \omega##?

Note that by definition we must to have ##H |n_x n_y \rangle = E_N |n_x n_y \rangle##.
 
damarkk said:
And this is my point: if ##H |0_x 0_y \rangle = 0##, how I can say that ##E_0 = \hbar \omega##?
You can't. As the Hamiltonian is set up, there is no zero-point energy (*). This is perfectly legitimate, as the zero of energy is arbitrary.

(*) If you were to draw the corresponding potential ##V(x)##, you would find that the minimum at ##V(0)## is not zero but negative, such that the ground state is exactly at ##E_0=0##.
 
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