Question about the best method to use for finding wavefunctions and eigenvalues

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the methods for finding wavefunctions and eigenvalues in quantum mechanics, particularly focusing on the use of annihilation and creation operators versus the traditional Schrödinger equation. Participants explore the applicability of these methods to various quantum systems, including the harmonic oscillator, finite square well, and hydrogen atom.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests using annihilation and creation operators to find the ground state wavefunction and energy eigenvalues, while questioning if this method is preferable to the Schrödinger equation.
  • Another participant argues that the creation and annihilation operator method is limited to simple quantum systems and may not be applicable for more complex Hamiltonians.
  • Some participants mention that for systems like the finite square well and hydrogen atom, direct solutions to the Schrödinger equation or approximation techniques like perturbation theory may be necessary.
  • A participant notes that the Schrödinger equation for hydrogen atoms is more complex and involves different equations for varying conditions.
  • There is a discussion about the need to understand Lie group theory to effectively use ladder operators in various quantum systems, with specific reference to the hydrogen atom and angular momentum.
  • One participant highlights the historical context of solving the hydrogen atom problem, mentioning contributions from Pauli and Fock.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of annihilation and creation operators, with some advocating for their use in simple systems while others emphasize the limitations in more complex scenarios. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best method to use in various contexts.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the effectiveness of the annihilation and creation operator method may depend on the specific quantum system being analyzed, and that approximation techniques may be required when exact solutions are not available.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and practitioners of quantum mechanics, particularly those exploring different methods for solving the Schrödinger equation and understanding the limitations of various approaches.

rwooduk
Messages
757
Reaction score
59
We have been covering the annhilation and creation operators in class.

You can use the annihilation operator to find the groundstate wavefunction, and then use the hamiltonian in terms of annhiliation and creation operators to find the energy eigen value of that state. (or you could put the wavefunction into the Schrödinger equation)

By acting the creation operatior on the groundstate wavefunction you can find the next excited state wavefunction.

My question is if a question asks you to find the eigenstates and eigenvalues for a particular system is it best to use these annihilation / creation operators or would it be better to use the Schrödinger equation in its 'original' form?

I think the benefit of the annihilation / creation operator method is that it allows you to find the quantised amount that each new energy level would be raised by, but you could also do this using the Schrödinger equation if you find the ground state energy and the next excited state energy.

I'm trying to get an idea of the methods used more generally at an advanced level.

Thanks in advance for any input!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Unfortunately the method of creation and annihilation operators only works for the very simplest quantum mechanical systems. When the Hamiltonian gets more complicated it can't be factored simply into creation and annihilation operators.

In a typical quantum mechanics class you'll learn about some other techniques for finding the energy eigenstates. In some simple cases, such as a finite square well, you can attack the Schrödinger equation directly. The hydrogen atom can by solved by a direct attack on the differential equation, or, if you are a bit clever, with creation and annihilation operators. But in most cases there's simply no known exact analytic solution to the Schrödinger equation and you have to resort to approximation techniques such as perturbation theory or variational methods.

Perturbation theory is the most important technique to understand to prepare for more advanced material such as quantum field theory.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba and rwooduk
The_Duck said:
Unfortunately the method of creation and annihilation operators only works for the very simplest quantum mechanical systems. When the Hamiltonian gets more complicated it can't be factored simply into creation and annihilation operators.

In a typical quantum mechanics class you'll learn about some other techniques for finding the energy eigenstates. In some simple cases, such as a finite square well, you can attack the Schrödinger equation directly. The hydrogen atom can by solved by a direct attack on the differential equation, or, if you are a bit clever, with creation and annihilation operators. But in most cases there's simply no known exact analytic solution to the Schrödinger equation and you have to resort to approximation techniques such as perturbation theory or variational methods.

Perturbation theory is the most important technique to understand to prepare for more advanced material such as quantum field theory.

Ahhh yes i wondered about its application to other quantum systems! We have only applied it to the simple harmonic oscillator, I was going to try and apply it to an infinite / finite squre well, are you saying its not possible using this method? May attempt the Hydrogen atom but really just trying to get an idea of what it works for and then choose the simplest method to use.

We have just started perturbation theory.

Many thanks for your answer! It's appreciated!
 
The SE for hydrogen atoms is a bit more complicated to solve as you will see(at a cirten point it involves power series of the differential). You have to different equations actually for the small and the large...(sorry I was talking about the wavefunction)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: rwooduk
rwooduk said:
May attempt the Hydrogen atom but really just trying to get an idea of what it works for and then choose the simplest method to use.
To find useful c/a operators (or more generally, "ladder operators"), one must understand the Lie group theory applicable to each particular problem.

The basic harmonic oscillator is easiest (Weyl/Heisenberg algebra).

For quantum angular momentum, it's also (relatively straightforward, cf. Ballentine ch 7).

For the H-atom, one can obtain the energy spectrum by Lie-algebraic analysis of the (suitably quantized) conserved quantities of the Kepler problem, but that's quite nontrivial. (Pauli did it before the Schrödinger equation appeared, but that just proves he was a f--ing genius.) oo)

Bottom line: you've got to understand the dynamical symmetries of the problem before trying to find useful c/a operators. Usually, they don't just fall out in any obvious way. There's been some recent work by Odake, Sasaki and others on doing this for a wider class of potentials, but you'll need strong stomach to wade through their papers.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: rwooduk
strangerep said:
[...]

For the H-atom, one can obtain the energy spectrum by Lie-algebraic analysis of the (suitably quantized) conserved quantities of the Kepler problem, but that's quite nontrivial. (Pauli did it before the Schrödinger equation appeared, but that just proves he was a f--ing genius.) oo)

To be fair (to my knowledge!), up to 1966, only the discrete spectrum of the Hamiltonian (of the 'dummy particle' in the Schrödinger eqn.for the H-atom) was 'solved' algebraically, in particular by Pauli in 1925, then of course by V.Fock in 1935 (<Hydrogen Atom and Non-Euclidean Geometry>,Zs. Phys., 98, N 3-4, 145, 1935). Oh yeah, Pauli was a very arrogant genius. :D
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: rwooduk

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 128 ·
5
Replies
128
Views
15K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K