Question on step potentials and schrodingers equatio

  • Thread starter Thread starter marmot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Potentials
marmot
Messages
55
Reaction score
1
I have a problem. I am trying to selfteach myself QM but I got stumped with this.

Basically, in the issue of 1D step potentias, I know that you have to divide the problem into regions and solve the schrodinger equation for each one. However, when you solve it, you always get two solutions due to the nature of the second order linear differential equation. (One representig a current oming from the left and the other from the right) However, I know sometimes one of the solutions vanishes. For ezample. if V>E in a<x<infinity, the solution will be an exponential wih negative exponent because the positive one vanishes (due to the physicallity of quantum tunneling. In certain instances there will be two solutions because of reflection, etc. However, how do I know when a solution vanishes? Are they rules of thumb or you simply solve for the coefficients using initial conditions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A specific question would be if a potential well with infinite potenial in one side, zero in the middle, and a finite potenial in the right side would have both current going to the right and the left?
 
marmot said:
I have a problem. I am trying to selfteach myself QM but I got stumped with this.

Basically, in the issue of 1D step potentias, I know that you have to divide the problem into regions and solve the schrodinger equation for each one. However, when you solve it, you always get two solutions due to the nature of the second order linear differential equation. (One representig a current oming from the left and the other from the right) However, I know sometimes one of the solutions vanishes. For ezample. if V>E in a<x<infinity, the solution will be an exponential wih negative exponent because the positive one vanishes (due to the physicallity of quantum tunneling. In certain instances there will be two solutions because of reflection, etc. However, how do I know when a solution vanishes? Are they rules of thumb or you simply solve for the coefficients using initial conditions?

In this case (in "bold"):
Lets say the wave is sent from the negative x-axis. In the region x<a, you will have two solutions because you have a wave traveling to the right (you sent it) and a reflected one from the potential. However, in the region a<x<oo we can't have two solutions. We only have a wave traveling to the right, no wave is traveling to the left since there is no other point (like a step potential) to reflect your wave.
So imagine a wave traveling at x=a, then some been reflected and other transmitted. The one that's been transmitted will be "alone" in that region (x>a).
 
Also, a solution that is non-normalizable has to vanish. This usually happens when it goes to infinity at some point, for example a solution of e^{bx} on the domain a&lt;x. The wavefunction would go to infinity as x\to\infty so there's no way to normalize it.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top