Undergrad Question on Harmonic Oscillator Series Derivation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the energy levels of the harmonic oscillator as presented in David Griffith's 'Introduction to Quantum Mechanics', 2nd ed. The key equation under scrutiny is the second-order differential equation $$\frac{d^2\psi}{d\xi^2} \approx \xi^2\psi$$. The participants clarify that the characteristic equation method is not applicable due to the variable nature of $$\xi$$, leading to an alternative approach of factoring the equation. The final form of the wave function is expressed as $$\psi(\xi) \approx Ae^{-\xi^2/2} + Be^{\xi^2/2}$$, which raises questions about the justification for combining solutions from single-order differential equations into an exponential form.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of second-order differential equations
  • Familiarity with quantum mechanics concepts, particularly harmonic oscillators
  • Knowledge of separation of variables technique
  • Basic grasp of exponential functions and their properties in differential equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the harmonic oscillator wave functions in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the method of separation of variables in solving differential equations
  • Explore the implications of commutation relations in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the characteristics of solutions to second-order linear differential equations
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those specializing in quantum mechanics, as well as mathematicians interested in differential equations and their applications in physical systems.

TRB8985
Messages
74
Reaction score
15
TL;DR
What is the mathematical justification for being able to use the solutions of single-order DE's for a second-order DE?
Good afternoon all,

On page 51 of David Griffith's 'Introduction to Quantum Mechanics', 2nd ed., there's a discussion involving the alternate method to getting at the energy levels of the harmonic oscillator. I'm filling in all the steps between the equations on my own, and I have a question between equation [2.74] and [2.75]. In particular, starting with the 2nd order DE:

$$\frac{d^2\psi}{d\xi^2} \approx \xi^2\psi $$​
I found in a similar post elsewhere that we can't attack this expression using the typical characteristic equation method, since we end up with:
$$\lambda^2 = \xi^2 $$​
and with ##\xi## playing the role of our variable, that's not allowed. To be honest, I don't quite understand why that's an issue, but I pressed on and found a suggestion to instead factor the first equation in the following manner:
$$\frac{d^2\psi}{d\xi^2} - \xi^2\psi = 0$$
$$(\frac{d^2}{d\xi^2} - \xi^2)\psi = 0 $$
$$(\frac{d^2}{d\xi^2}+\xi)(\frac{d^2}{d\xi^2} - \xi)\psi=0 $$​
Separating these two factors is easy using separation of variables, and I end up with what I see in the form of Griffiths' answer in 2.75. My two solutions would be:
$$\psi(\xi)_1 = \xi^2/2 + constant$$
$$\psi(\xi)_2 = -\xi^2/2 + constant$$​
What's missing in my understanding is the justification to take these solutions of these single-order differential equations and string them together in exponentials to become the following:
$$\psi(\xi) \approx Ae^{-\xi^2/2} +Be^{\xi^2/2}$$​
I am aware that, generally speaking, when solving 2nd order differential equations the substitution of ##e^{\lambda x}## will be used and the characteristic equation is the main plan of attack. In those circumstances, answers generally take the form of the above equation. But in this situation, we didn't solve the characteristic equation. We just factored the expression, solved it individually, then inserted it in the exponent of an exponential. What allows us to do that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I assume the formula you propose is
(\frac{d}{d\xi}+\xi)(\frac{d}{d\xi}-\xi)\psi=0
or
(\frac{d}{d\xi}-\xi)(\frac{d}{d\xi}+\xi)\psi=0
However they become
(\frac{d^2}{d^2\xi}-\xi^2 \pm 1)\psi=0
due to commutation relation of ##\frac{d}{d\xi}## and ##\xi##. It differs from the original formula.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K