Quantum numbers for energy levels

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the combinations of quantum numbers for energy levels in infinite potential wells, particularly in two dimensions. Participants explore the relationships between quantum numbers and energy levels, questioning how to derive energy values and the implications of degeneracy in these systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that for an energy level $$E_4$$ in a 2D well, the combinations of quantum numbers could be represented as $$4^2 + 1^2$$ and $$1^2 + 4^2$$, leading to a specific energy expression.
  • Others question the validity of labeling the energy level as $$E_4$$, suggesting that it may actually correspond to $$E_6$$ instead, and seek clarification on the definitions of $$E_1, E_2, E_3$$.
  • One participant mentions the need to justify the choice of energy level and expresses confusion regarding how quantum numbers increase with energy levels.
  • Another participant clarifies that for a square well, energy levels can be expressed as combinations of states, such as $$E_{n_x} + E_{n_y}$$, and notes the presence of degeneracy in energy levels.
  • A participant discusses the requirement for a complete set of orthonormal eigenvectors to solve the energy eigenvalue problem, providing a mathematical formulation for the energy eigenvalues in two dimensions.
  • Some participants highlight that in a 2D infinite square well, energy levels are labeled with two indices, such as $$E_{1,1}, E_{1,2}, E_{2,1}$$, and discuss the implications of degeneracy in labeling energy states.
  • There is a mention of the arbitrary nature of labeling energy eigenstates and the choice of coordinates, with references to different systems like the hydrogen atom.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the labeling of energy levels and the combinations of quantum numbers, indicating that multiple competing views remain. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the correct approach to defining energy levels in this context.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the labeling of energy levels can depend on the definitions used and that degeneracy complicates the uniqueness of these labels. There are also references to different coordinate systems and their implications for the problem at hand.

TheCelt
Messages
24
Reaction score
5
Hello

Can some one explain how you work out the combinations of quantum numbers for infinite wells in higher dimensions?

For example if i have an energy level $$E_4$$ In a 2D well, then for quantum numbers does this mean the combinations allowed must be:

$$4^2 + 1^2$$
$$1^2 + 4^2$$

So then you have:

$$ E_4 = 17 \pi^2 \hbar^2 / 2mL^2 $$

Or this not how it works ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
TheCelt said:
Hello

Can some one explain how you work out the combinations of quantum numbers for infinite wells in higher dimensions?

For example if i have an energy level $$E_4$$ In a 2D well, then for quantum numbers does this mean the combinations allowed must be:

$$4^2 + 1^2$$
$$1^2 + 4^2$$

So then you have:

$$ E_4 = 17 \pi^2 \hbar^2 / 2mL^2 $$

Or this not how it works ?
Why would that be ##E_4##? What are ##E_1, E_2, E_3##?
 
I'm not given that info, I'm trying to find the difference in energy to the ground state. Why would it not be E4?
 
TheCelt said:
I'm not given that info, I'm trying to find the difference in energy to the ground state. Why would it not be E4?
If you say it's ##E_4## it's up to you to justify why. I think it's ##E_6##.
 
Last edited:
Well i presmued for an energy level $$E_n$$ there must be one quantum number that must be n the others are 1 ? Otherwise I am confused on how the quantum numbers increase for each energy level ?
 
TheCelt said:
Well i presmued for an energy level $$E_n$$ there must be one quantum number that must be n the others are 1 ? Otherwise I am confused on how the quantum numbers increase for each energy level ?
What source are you using to learn this? In general, you have all combinations of energy states in each dimension: ##E_{n_x} + E_{n_y}##. For a square well, the energy levels will be: ##E_1 + E_1, E_1 + E_2, E_2 + E_2, E_1 + E_3 \dots##.

Note also that the eneregy levels ##E_1 + E_2## etc. are degenerate, as you can also have ##E_2 + E_1##.
 
I do not understand the notation to begin with. To solve the energy eigenvalue problem completely you need to find a complete set of orthonormal eigenvectors of the Hamiltonian and the corresponding eigenvalues.

If I understand it right, you discuss here the infinite square potential for a particle in two dimensions, i.e., a particle restricted to ##(x,y) \in [0,a] \times [0,b]##. Obviously the most simple complete set of energy eigenvectors are the momentum eigenstates, which are given by
$$u_{i,j}(\vec{x})=A \sin(k_{xi} x) \sin(k_{yj} y), \quad k_{xi}=\frac{\pi}{a} i, \quad k_{yj} = \frac{\pi}{b} j, \quad i,j \in \mathbb{N}=\{1,2,\ldots \}.$$
The ##A## can be chosen to normlize the eigenfunctions and make the a complete orthonormal set of energy eigenvectors.

The corresponding energy eigenvalues are labelled with the two indices ##i## and ##j##:
$$E_{i,j}=\frac{1}{2 m} \hbar^2 (k_{xi}^2+k_{yj}^2).$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jtbell and dextercioby
Yes, for e.g. a 2-dimensional infinite square well you don't have E1, E2, etc. Instead you have E1,1, E1,2, E2,1, E2,2, E3,1, E3,2, etc.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
jtbell said:
Yes, for e.g. a 2-dimensional infinite square well you don't have E1, E2, etc. Instead you have E1,1, E1,2, E2,1, E2,2, E3,1, E3,2, etc.

Well...

The way you do it is the way I do it, but not the way everyone would do it. You can have (in the 2D case)

E0 = 2, which is the (1,1) case.
E1 = 5, which is a doublet (2-fold degenerate), (1,2) and (2,1)
E2 = 8, again a singlet: (2,2)
E3 = 10, which is another doublet, (1,3) and (3,1)
E4 = 13, which is another doublet, (2,3) and (3,1)

While this looks pointless for the infinite square well, it makes more sense for the hydrogen atom and the simple harmonic oscillator.
 
  • #10
Well, labelling in this way in the degenerate case is not unique, which is why it's called degenerate. If you want the energy eigenstates and the energy eigenvalues are degnerate, you can always find other observables than the energy, which are conserved and compatible to each other. If you have enough such observables (in the ideal case you have a complete compatible set of observables) the energy eigenstates are labelled uniquely and it's also useful to label the energy eigenvalues by these unique "labels".

E.g., for the hydrogen atom you have ##(n,\ell,m,\sigma_3)## (main quantum number, angular momementum, magnetic quantum number, and spin projection). Here the energy eigenvalues are ##2n^2##-fold degenerate (in the most simple approximation in QM 1 neglecting fine structure etc).
 
  • #11
But by labeling the hydrogen atom that way, you've made a choice on how to think about the problem: spherical coordinates. Everybody knows the natural coordinates are parabolic. :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
  • #12
Vanadium 50 said:
E1 = 5, which is a doublet (2-fold degenerate), (1,2) and (2,1)
I see now that the OP used only one L, which presumably indicates that Lx = Ly. I was thinking of the more general case in which Lx ≠ Ly and the levels are not degenerate.
 
  • #13
Vanadium 50 said:
But by labeling the hydrogen atom that way, you've made a choice on how to think about the problem: spherical coordinates. Everybody knows the natural coordinates are parabolic. :wink:
Sure, that's natural if you have a degeneracy. Which additional observables you choose to uniquely define the energy eigenstates is arbitrary, but of course the physics doesn't change. You get from one description to the other by a unitary transformation between the resulting orthonormal bases of energy eigenvectors.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K