Quantum mechanics particle in a well

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a quantum mechanics problem involving a particle in an infinite square well potential defined between -a and a. Participants clarify the concept of an even state, emphasizing that it refers to a wave function that is symmetric, satisfying f(x) = f(-x). The confusion about redefining the coordinate system is addressed, confirming that the boundary conditions should ensure the wave function goes to zero at both -a and a. The need to eliminate the wave number k from final calculations is also highlighted. Ultimately, the participant resolves their confusion with assistance from others.
kcasali
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Given is an infinite square well potential. V=infinity at x=a, x=-a. V=0 between -a and a. Take an even state u=Ccos(kx), and find <x>,<x^2>,<p_x>, and <(p_x)^2>. Your final answers should not contain k, which will be eliminated by the boundary conditions.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I'm really just generally confused by this question, and I need a nudge in the right direction.

I know how to find the wavefunction and energy if the well is between 0 and a, how do I find it between -a and a? Can I just redefine the coordinate system so that the well is between 0 and 2a? Also, what does he mean by an even state? That the energy is in an even state?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What boundary conditions did you use when you solved the problem in the case where the well is 0 and a? My guess is that you required that the wavefunction go to zero at 0 an a. Do the same for -a and a and you should be ok. An even state means that the quantum number is even.
 
Amok said:
An even state means that the quantum number is even.
That's not correct for this problem.

An even state is where the wave function is even, i.e. f(x)=f(-x).
 
True, sorry about that.
 
I figured it out, thanks for the help. :)
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top