Quantum Mechanics and Eigenfunctions Checks

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining whether specific wave functions are eigenfunctions of the momentum operator by checking the eigenvalue equation. The first wave function, ψ(x) = √(2/L) cos(xπ/L), is analyzed by applying the momentum operator and checking if the result is proportional to the original function. Participants clarify that differentiating the wave function is necessary to assess proportionality, and they discuss the implications of the results, particularly regarding the need for the eigenvalue to be real. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the relationship between sine and cosine functions in this context. Overall, the thread highlights the mathematical approach required to verify eigenfunctions in quantum mechanics.
TFM
Messages
1,016
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



For each of the following wave functions check whether they are eigenfunctions of the momentum operator, ie whether they satisfy the eigenvalue equation:

\hat{p} \psi(x) = p\psi(x) with \hat{p} = i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial x} and p is a real number.

For those that are eigenfunctions, calculate the eigenvalue p, the expectation value〈\hat{p}〉, and the standard deviation Δ\hat{p} ̂.

(a)

\psi(x) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}} cos(\frac{x\pi}{L}) for -L/2 \leq x \leqL/2

0 for x > L/2, x < -L/2

(b)

\phi(x)= \frac{1}{\sqrt{L}}e^{ikx} for 0 \leq x \leq L with k is real [\tex]<br /> <br /> 0 for x &gt; L, x &lt; 0<br /> <br /> <br /> (c)<br /> <br /> \chi (x) = 2xe^{-x} for 0 \leq x<br /> 0 for x &lt; 0<br /> <br /> <br /> <h2>Homework Equations</h2><br /> <br /> N/A<br /> <br /> <h2>The Attempt at a Solution</h2><br /> <br /> Okay, I have gone some way through the first part.<br /> <br /> \hat{p} = -i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial}<br /> <br /> -i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial x}(\sqrt{\frac{2}{L}}cos\frac{x\pi}{L})<br /> <br /> -i\hbar \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x}(cos\frac{x\pi}{L})<br /> <br /> With Limits between L/2 and -L/2<br /> <br /> -i\hbar \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}} (-\frac{\pi}{L}sin\frac{x\pi}{L})^{L/2}_{-L/2}<br /> <br /> -i\hbar \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}} ([-\frac{\pi}{L}sin\frac{L\pi}{2L}]-[-\frac{\pi}{L}sin\frac{-L\pi}{2L}])<br /> <br /> -i\hbar \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}} ([-\frac{\pi}{L}sin\frac{\pi}{2}]-[-\frac{\pi}{L}sin\frac{-\pi}{2}])<br /> <br /> But I am unsure where I am supoosed to go from here...<br /> <br /> To show it is a Eigenfunction, I need to get rid of the i at the very begining, but I am unsure how to do this?<br /> <br /> Any suggesstions where to rpoceed?<br /> <br /> Thanks in advance,<br /> <br /> TFM
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You do not need the boundary conditions to check if a function is an eigenstate so no need to replace x by L/2 or -L/2. These limits only enter when you calculate the expectation values.


You must ask yourself if the function you get after applying i \hbar \partial_x to \psi is proportional to the wavefunction itself. If yes, then the wavefunction is an eigenstate and the constant of proportionality is the eigenvalue. If not, the function is not an eigenstate.
 
Last edited:
So do I need to differnitiate it then?
 
TFM said:
So do I need to differnitiate it then?

Yes. Sorry, there was a typo in my post and the partial derivative did not show up. Yes, you must apply i \hbar \partial_x to \psi and check if the result is proportional to the wavefunction itself. Is it possible to write \sin(\pi x/l) as a constant times \cos (\pi x/L) in such a way that the result will be valid for any value of x ? If the answer is no, then this wavefunction (the cos) is not an eigenstate of the momentum operator
 
Okay so the original wavefunction is:

\psi(x) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}} cos(\frac{x\pi}{L}) --- (1)

The \hat{p} function is:

-i\hbar \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}} (-\frac{\pi}{L}sin\frac{x\pi}{L}) Which can be simplified to:

i\hbar \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}} * \frac{\pi}{L}sin\frac{x\pi}{L}

So now I have to see if this result is proportional to (1).

So I have to find how to write sin(\frac{\pi x}{L}) as C cos(\frac{\pi x}{L})

Can this actually be done, though, since the only relation I know that will link sin and cos is sin^2(\theta) + cos^2(\theta) = 1?

Also, do I need to get rid of that i at the beginning, since p needs to be a real number?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top