Question regarding 1-D PIW thought problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter karma345
  • Start date Start date
karma345
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
We know that all states of the wavefunctions must be quantized. Therefore, when we have a particle, say an electron, trapped in a well with infinite potentials on either side - let's set the boundaries to the traditional -1/2L to 1/2L - the ground state of the energy must give us a wavelength which must be, at most, 1/2lambda=L. We then can have n number of 1/2lambdas within the well, and we can describe those states alternatingly with Cos and Sin functions - but n must be a whole integer - otherwise the state is not quantized. Now, suppose we inject a single electron, at a velocity of .01c, let's be more specific about it and say 1x10^6 m/s, into a well that is 4 Angstroms wide - i.e. from -1/2L to 1/2L, we have a space spanning 4 Angstroms. We know, from the DeBroglie relation that the wavelength of the electron at that speed is approximately 7 Angstroms. What happens when the electron enters that well? Will the energy state immediately adapt to a quantized level - and if so, will it immediately fall to ground state or will it adapt to the nearest frequency which allows whole numbers of half wavelengths in the 4 Angstrom well? Or does the whole system just break down?

Jason
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello,

What you describe are the so-called stationary states, that means, states with a definite energy value (which also have the property of not evolving in time - up to a phase factor). But in quantum mechanics, there is the fundamental principle of superposition, so many more states than these stationary states are allowed. When you have "initial conditions" as you describe them which do not correspond to a stationary state, you will in fact have to describe it as a superposition of stationary states : in the case you cite, this would come down to writing down a Fourier series in which you devellop the initial state.
So you simply have a non-stationary state.

cheers,
Patrick.
 
vanesch said:
Hello,

When you have "initial conditions" as you describe them which do not correspond to a stationary state, you will in fact have to describe it as a superposition of stationary states : in the case you cite, this would come down to writing down a Fourier series in which you devellop the initial state.

cheers,
Patrick.


I see. That makes perfect sense. The text never reallly makes that abundantly clear, althought I can see where it is implied in the context. Thanks.

Jason
 
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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
This is still a great mystery, Einstein called it ""spooky action at a distance" But science and mathematics are full of concepts which at first cause great bafflement but in due course are just accepted. In the case of Quantum Mechanics this gave rise to the saying "Shut up and calculate". In other words, don't try to "understand it" just accept that the mathematics works. The square root of minus one is another example - it does not exist and yet electrical engineers use it to do...
Back
Top