Quantum Mechanics - Superposition of Wavefunctions?

pearapple
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The wavefunction for a particle in one dimension is given by
ψ1. Another state the particle may be in is ψ2. A third state the particle could be in is ψ3.

Looking at the wavefunctions, ψ3 is ψ1 and ψ2 added together.

Is the probability of being in a given interval in ψ3 the same as the separate probabilities for ψ1 and ψ2 for that interval?

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I don't really understand how superposition works. I read something about the ψ's being linear, so a linear combination of ψ1 and ψ2 (ie. ψ3) is still a solution to the Schrodinger equation.

Is the superposition state a completely different state still though? I don't get why I am being asked this question. If it's a mixture of the two states, the probabilities would change wouldn't they? I don't see the link here.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Suppose the particle is in the state ψ1 and say the probability of finding it in the interval a ≤ x ≤ b is p1. Similarly, suppose the particle is in the state ψ2 and the corresponding probability is p2, and likewise for state ψ3.

The question is asking you, I believe, if it's true that p3 = p1 + p2.
 
Thanks! I believe you're right.

In general, I don't think p3 = p1 + P2.

I don't think I could explain why though. I just don't see WHY those would be equal, because although state 3 is a superposition, it is still a new state is it not? Is there some situation in which p3 = p1 + P2 is true?
 
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