Quantum Mechanics Integration Problem

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on Griffith Problem 5.11, focusing on the integration of the expression \(\frac{1}{|{\vec r}_{1}-{\vec r}_{2}|}\) using the Legendre polynomial expansion. The formula provided simplifies the integration by expressing the potential in terms of Legendre polynomials \(P_{\ell}(\cos \theta)\) and the radial distances \(r_{<}\) and \(r_{>}\). Participants emphasize the necessity of breaking the integral into two cases based on the relative sizes of \(\vec{r}_1\) and \(\vec{r}_2\) and suggest that only a few terms, specifically \(P_0\) and \(P_1\), are needed for practical integration.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Griffith's Quantum Mechanics textbook
  • Familiarity with Legendre polynomials and their properties
  • Basic knowledge of vector calculus and integration techniques
  • Concept of orthonormality in polynomial functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties and applications of Legendre polynomials in quantum mechanics
  • Learn techniques for breaking integrals into cases based on variable relationships
  • Explore direct integration methods for potential functions in quantum mechanics
  • Review the orthonormality of polynomial functions and its implications in integration
USEFUL FOR

Students of quantum mechanics, particularly those tackling Griffith's problems, as well as educators and tutors seeking to clarify integration techniques involving Legendre polynomials.

CrusaderSean
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
I'm doing Griffith Problem 5.11 and I'm stuck on how to do the integration. My prof. gave hints on how to simplify the integration with the following formula:

[tex]\frac{1}{|{\vec r}_{1}-{\vec r}_{2}|} = \sum_{\ell = 0}^{\infty}<br /> P_{\ell}( \cos \theta) \frac{r_{<}^{\ell}}{r_{>}^{\ell +1}}[/tex]
where
[tex]\cos \theta = \frac{{\vec r}_1 \cdot {\vec r}_2}{r_1 r_2}[/tex]

[tex]P_{\ell}(x)=\frac{1}{2^{\ell}\ell !}(\frac{d}{dx})^{\ell}(x^{2}-1)^{\ell}[/tex]

[tex]r_<[/tex] is the smaller of [tex]|{\vec r}_1|, |{\vec r_2}|[/tex]

I haven't had advanced electrodynamics yet so it's my first time seeing this type of expansion.

Since I don't really know if [tex]\vec r}_1[/tex] is bigger or smaller than [tex]\vec r}_2[/tex], do I need to do expansion for both cases and add them?...

How many terms do I keep in Legendre polynomial? I recall professor saying something about only one or two terms, but I don't see how you can truncate the series like that...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
CrusaderSean said:
I'm doing Griffith Problem 5.11 and I'm stuck on how to do the integration. My prof. gave hints on how to simplify the integration with the following formula:

[tex]\frac{1}{|{\vec r}_{1}-{\vec r}_{2}|} = \sum_{\ell = 0}^{\infty}<br /> P_{\ell}( \cos \theta) \frac{r_{<}^{\ell}}{r_{>}^{\ell +1}}[/tex]
where
[tex]\cos \theta = \frac{{\vec r}_1 \cdot {\vec r}_2}{r_1 r_2}[/tex]

[tex]P_{\ell}(x)=\frac{1}{2^{\ell}\ell !}(\frac{d}{dx})^{\ell}(x^{2}-1)^{\ell}[/tex]

[tex]r_<[/tex] is the smaller of [tex]|{\vec r}_1|, |{\vec r_2}|[/tex]

I haven't had advanced electrodynamics yet so it's my first time seeing this type of expansion.

Since I don't really know if [tex]\vec r}_1[/tex] is bigger or smaller than [tex]\vec r}_2[/tex], do I need to do expansion for both cases and add them?...

How many terms do I keep in Legendre polynomial? I recall professor saying something about only one or two terms, but I don't see how you can truncate the series like that...


Well, it *is* possible to do the integral without ever introducing the above expansion! Does he require you to use it?

In either case, you *have* to break the integral in wto cases acoording to whether r_2 is larger than r_1 or smaller. There is no way around this.

If you have to use the abpve formula then you have to write the rest of the theta dependence of the integrand in terms of some P_l(cos theta). You will surely get just a few terms, probably a linear combination of P_0 and P_1. Then you can use orthonormality of the P_l to do the integral over theta easily.

But if you have never used those P_l, it would be simpler to do the integral directly.
 
well I don't *have* to use the expansion to do the integral. I guess I'll the integral directly first and see if I can understand how this expansion works (suppose to make the integral easier).
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K