Re-arranging the Schrodinger equation

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
10 replies · 3K views
vorcil
Messages
395
Reaction score
0
I just have a small question,

In my book it says that the Schrödinger equation,

[tex] i\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + V\Psi[/tex]

rearranged is,

[tex] \frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = \frac{i\hbar}{2m}\frac{\partial\Psi ^2 psi}{\partial x^2} - \frac{i}{\hbar}V\Psi[/tex]

how does the complex number, move over, and in the numerator? instead of the denominatior?

I can see how [tex]A\hbar = B\hbar ^2 becomes A = B \hbar[/tex]

but I don't understand how

[tex]A i = B + V\Psi becomes A = iB - i V\hbar[/tex]

could someone please explain to me the mathematical rules behind rearranging complex numbers in equations,

or give me some links that explain it, (in simple terms) please :P
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex]\frac{1}{i}=-i[/tex]

This is one of the properties of imaginary numbers. I don't exactly recall a proof for this...hopefully someone else can answer your question in more detail.
 
Do you know what I would search for If i wanted to understand how to manipulate i?

I tried the wikipedia log of complex numbers, but it is jungle of crap that is too hard to understand
tl;dr
 
Matterwave said:
[tex]\frac{1}{i}=-i[/tex]

This is one of the properties of imaginary numbers. I don't exactly recall a proof for this...hopefully someone else can answer your question in more detail.
Like this?
[tex]\frac{1}{i} = \frac{1}{i}\frac{i}{i} = \frac{i}{i^2} = \frac{i}{-1} = -i[/tex]
 
JaWiB said:
Like this?
[tex]\frac{1}{i} = \frac{1}{i}\frac{i}{i} = \frac{i}{i^2} = \frac{i}{-1} = -i[/tex]

JaWiB

how do i do this

[tex] A i = B + V\Psi to A = iB - i V\Psi[/tex]
 
I don't think what you have is correct.
[tex] i\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + V\Psi[/tex]
If you multiply both sides by [tex]i/\hbar[/tex], you get
[tex] -\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = i\frac{\hbar}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + \frac{i}{\hbar}V\Psi[/tex]
or
[tex] \frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = -i\frac{\hbar}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} - \frac{i}{\hbar}V\Psi[/tex]
 
mmmm well that's closer then to what I had,

thank you i'll ask my tutors tomorrow
 
You have the Schrödinger equation wrong. It should be:

[tex] i\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} =- \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + V\Psi[/tex]
 
Cyosis said:
You have the Schrödinger equation wrong. It should be:

[tex] i\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} =- \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + V\Psi[/tex]

so Jawib's way does work!??
 
I need to take some math papers...
I'm not as good as the rest of the physics majors at mathematics,

I've only done 1 math paper and 5 physics ones

I didn't even think to multiply both sides by i/h, like Jawib said :(

study study study
 
vorcil said:
I need to take some math papers...
I'm not as good as the rest of the physics majors at mathematics,

I've only done 1 math paper and 5 physics ones

I didn't even think to multiply both sides by i/h, like Jawib said :(

study study study

If you had kept at it, you would have got it eventually. You gave up. If you give up a lot that is a problem. Half-hearted studying won't get you anywhere.