Regarding an approximation of p as 1 over r

  • Thread starter Thread starter 14lawrenze
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Approximation
14lawrenze
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



estimate the ground energy of a bound qqbar system , the total hamiltonian can be written as ,
H(r)=2m-a/r+br+p^2/m,where a=0.5, b=0.18Gev^2, m being the mass of quark or antiquark the book kinds of gives Hint " p may be approximated as 1 over r" ,natural unit is assumed ,(c=hbar=1)

Homework Equations


In particular , my question ," why we could always argue that p may be approximated as 1 over r" the uncertainty principle can be essentially delivered by an inequalitiy deltax*deltap>=1/2, where deltax is understood as x-<x>, it imposes , according to the widely accepted understanding of quantum physics, an upper limit to the degree of precision we may
reach in measurement . nevertheless , in "this "homework " , why we'd just approximate p as 1 over r , as we do all the time , like we argue that an electron may never fall into nucleus.
we seem to always approximate momentum as inverse r , and that is why?
sorry for the sloppy language ,and it's technically a homework problem , I wanted to post it in other sections ,though.

The Attempt at a Solution


 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am trying to solve this problem , but I just find it odd that we can always approximate the momentum as inverse r
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top