Relativistic E/p relations in the WKB Approximation

FunkyDwarf
Messages
481
Reaction score
0
EDIT: fixed minus sign issue =)

Hey,

I have what is probably a rather trivial question but I just want to ensure that I'm on the right track :)

If I have a wave equation of the form
-\psi''(r) +A(r) \psi(r) = 0

then one can invoke (in suitable circumstances) the semi-classical (WKB) approximation such that the solution is of the form

\psi(r) \approx \frac{1}{\sqrt{p(r)}} \sin\left(\int p(r) dr\right)
where
p(r) = \int \sqrt{-A(r)}dr (assuming phase at r = 0 is 0 and no absorption is occurring).

My question ultimately has to do with the relativistic E/p relation, specifically in the case where I have a particle in some central potential. For arguments sake let's say I cannot separate A(r) into a nice potential form, ie an energy part and a potential part.

Is it still fair to say that when m = 0 the momentum p(r) must be linear in energy ? ie can I write the phase as the following:
\Phi(r) = \int p(r) dr = \epsilon \int f(r) dr

If so, can I also extend this to the case where m !=0, ie write
\Phi(r) = \int p(r) dr = \int \sqrt{\epsilon^2 g(r)-m^2 h(r)} dr
(keeping in mind A(r) could be a total mess, i.e. very different radial dependences on energy and mass, say)

Obviously I can't use the normal \epsilon = \sqrt{p^2 + m^2}, but is the above the correct natural extension?

Hope that made sense, and thanks in advance for replies (if they're helpful =P)!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, it is correct to extend the semi-classical approximation to the case when m != 0. The expression you have written for the phase is correct, and you can use it to calculate the momentum as a function of energy and mass. Also, note that the expression you have written for the phase is also valid in the case when m = 0, so you don't need to make any special cases for m = 0.
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top