Quantum Mechanics: Questions on Stationary Particles & Wave Function

  • Thread starter Thread starter neelakash
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qm
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the nature of stationary particles in Quantum Mechanics (QM) and their associated wave functions. It establishes that while a particle can be considered "at rest" with zero momentum, it cannot have a definite position due to the principles of QM. The wave function for such a particle is represented as a constant Ψ(x)=C, indicating a stationary probability density. The conversation also touches on the mathematical expressions for expected values of position and momentum, emphasizing the necessity of using the complex conjugate Ψ* in these calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Quantum Mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with wave functions and their properties
  • Knowledge of Fourier transforms in quantum physics
  • Basic grasp of operators and expected values in QM
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of eigenstates of a Hamiltonian in Quantum Mechanics
  • Learn about the implications of the uncertainty principle on stationary states
  • Explore the mathematical derivation of expected values in quantum systems
  • Investigate the role of wave functions in describing particle behavior in QM
USEFUL FOR

Students of Quantum Physics, physicists exploring foundational concepts, and anyone interested in the mathematical framework of wave functions and stationary states in Quantum Mechanics.

neelakash
Messages
491
Reaction score
1
I have started my course (a bit earlier than my university---that is why I am reading myself) in Quantum Physics.And I got the following queries to clarify:
Sometimes we need to accept seemingly contradictory features...I want to discuss them and clarify...

(i)Can we conceive a stationary (at rest) particle in QM?If so,do we need to associate a wave-function with it?

What I think:Qm is not worried about this.Even if it is possible,there will be no physically interesting situation...

(ii)In the expression of a(p),which is the Fourier transform of Ψ(x),time t is explicit.Yet, a(p) does not depend on time.

What I think:I do not understand why.

(iii) We know: <x>=∫(Ψ* x Ψ) dx and <p>=(ˉh/i) ∫[Ψ* (∂/∂x) Ψ] dx
where (h/2π)= ˉh


Why is Ψ* in the front place and not the Ψ?What would be the problem if the formula were:

<x>=∫(Ψ x Ψ*) dx and <p>=(ˉh/i) ∫[Ψ (∂/∂x) Ψ*] dx

What I think: I do not understand.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
neelakash said:
(i)Can we conceive a stationary (at rest) particle in QM?If so,do we need to associate a wave-function with it?

What I think:Qm is not worried about this.Even if it is possible,there will be no physically interesting situation...

Stationary, and at rest, do not mean the same in QM.

A wavefunction is stationary in QM if its probability density does not change with time. This is the case for all the eigenstates of a hamiltonian.

Classically, a particle at rest will have a definite position and a definite momentum (p=0), in a given
instant of time. This is not possible in quantum mechanics. And, as quantum mechanics is (so far)
succesful in describing nature, there are no particles strictly at rest in nature.

If you define "at rest", as something having zero momentum, one can have such a particle in QM, and it will be described by a wavefunction, given by a constant Ψ(x)=C, which will have zero momentum, but the position will be completely undetermined.


Have fun with quantum mechanics. Your other questions will be clear once that you follow your QM course.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K