Scattering partial wave expansion question

VortexLattice
Messages
140
Reaction score
0
Hi, I'm reading about the partial wave expansion in Shankar. In his method, we expand the incident plane wave (he chooses it such that it's coming in along the z axis, and using spherical coordinates) using the Legendre polynomials:

e^{ikr cos(\theta)} = \sum _{l = 0} ^\infty i^l (2l + 1) j_l(kr)P_l(cos(\theta))

Then he says that "since the potential conserves angular momentum, each angular momentum component scatters independently". I get what he's saying, but my question is: Why couldn't the values of j_l(kr) switch around such that the various angular momentum components switch around, but the total amount is still conserved?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Suppose we just had a single incoming partial wave instead of a bunch of them superposed. This partial wave has a definite L and m. Since the Hamiltonian conserves angular momentum, the outgoing, scattered wave must have the same L and m, i.e. it must be proportional to the incoming partial wave, since there is only one partial wave for each possible (L,m) pair. When we superpose a bunch of partial waves to get a plane wave, each partial wave still scatters in this simple way, because of linearity/the superposition principle.
 
The_Duck said:
Suppose we just had a single incoming partial wave instead of a bunch of them superposed. This partial wave has a definite L and m. Since the Hamiltonian conserves angular momentum, the outgoing, scattered wave must have the same L and m, i.e. it must be proportional to the incoming partial wave, since there is only one partial wave for each possible (L,m) pair. When we superpose a bunch of partial waves to get a plane wave, each partial wave still scatters in this simple way, because of linearity/the superposition principle.

I see what you're saying, I think: that when there is a partial wave of only one L and m, the scattered wave has to have that. But when there are a bunch of partial waves with different L's, why can't their amplitudes switch around such that the total L is still conserved?

Thanks!
 
The system is linear - the incoming wave with a superposition of different L can be viewed as the sum of individual incoming waves with fixed L.
 
mfb said:
The system is linear - the incoming wave with a superposition of different L can be viewed as the sum of individual incoming waves with fixed L.

Hmmm, right... Ok, I have another question about the partial wave expansion. He does an example of scattering off a hard sphere, and then shows some qualitative stuff about it at the end. He says about an equation for k -> 0 (low energy): "This agrees with the intuitive expectation that at low energies there should be negligible scattering in the high angular momentum states."

I don't see that intuitively. Why would high angular momentum states scatter less, intuitively?

Thanks!
 
How do you get high angular momentum with low energy => low momentum? Angular momentum is momentum times distance of closest approach. The velocity is fixed, so you need a large distance of closest approach. With a hard sphere, this value is limited by the radius of the sphere.
 
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