Question about quantum harmonic oscilator

Miguel Paramo
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi, I am preparing for a quantum mechanics exam, and I have this problem that I can`t solve:

I have to find the complete energy eigenvalue spectrum of a hamiltonean of the form:

H = H0 + c

and also another of the form

H = H0 + \lambdax^{2}

Where in both cases, H0 is the hamiltonean of an harmonic oscilator, c and lambda are constants. The variable is x.

I have to find the exact eigenvalues, cannot use perturbation theory, but I can use the fact that I already know the eigenvalues for the harmonic oscilator.

Can anybody help?

Thant you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Miguel Paramo said:
H = H0 + c

Let's do this one first. After we get this, we'll do the second one. Might have to take a supper break in the middle

Suppose |psi> is such that

H0 |psi> = E |psi>.

What does H |psi> equal?
 
Thak you.

Well, I think that H|Psi> = (Ho+C)|Psi> = (E+C)|Psi>

The the eignevalues are just E+C, where E is the harmonic oscilator energy:

E = (n+1/2)\hbar\omega

If it is just that it was so easy, but the second part looks more complicated.

I made a mistake when I copy the problems, the hamiltonean should read:

H = H0 + \lambdax (instead of the x being squared).

Thank you!
 
Miguel Paramo said:
I made a mistake when I copy the problems, the hamiltonean should read:

H = H0 + \lambdax (instead of the x being squared).

Thank you!

I think I liked it better with x^2!

Maybe try and complete the square for the two terms

\frac{1}{2}m \omega^2 x^2 + \lambda x[/itex].
 
OK, I completed squares so the potencial energy part of the hamiltoneal reads:

(1/2) mw^{2} [ x + (\lambda/ (m w^{2})) ]^{2} - (\lambda^{2} / 2m).

I think that I should now define y as y= x + (\lambda/ (m w^{2}))

So that the term reads

(1/2) mw^{2} y^{2} - (\lambda^{2} / 2m)

So, as a function of y, the hamiltonean is again an harmonic oscilator plus a constant, and I can solve it as the previous excercise.

My doubt is if the change of variable may alter the kinetic energy part of the hamiltonean, which depends on the second derivative of x. My guess is that not because the relation between x and y is linear.

Thank you for you help!
 
\frac{d}{dx} = \frac{dy}{dx} \frac{d}{dy} = \frac{d}{dy},

so, as you say, I don't think the kinetic energy term changes.
 
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