Schrodinger Equation : Infinite Square Well

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the Schrödinger equation to the infinite square well problem in quantum mechanics. Participants explore the mathematical solutions, boundary conditions, and normalization factors associated with the wave functions in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the wave function can be expressed as Aexp(ikx) and suggests that the case of sin(ka) = 0 may be irrelevant if A = 0.
  • Another participant explains that exp(ikx), exp(-ikx), sin(kx), and cos(kx) are all valid solutions of the time-independent Schrödinger equation, noting that the general solution can be expressed in different forms.
  • A different participant proposes a method of solving the problem using the superposition of e^{ikx} and e^{-ikx}, emphasizing the importance of boundary conditions and the implications of having A and B both equal to zero.
  • One participant seeks clarification on the normalization factor of 1/SQRT(a) and its derivation, indicating uncertainty about its significance.
  • Another participant confirms that the normalization factor arises from integrating sine squared over the interval [-a, a].
  • A later reply indicates that the participant has resolved their confusion regarding the normalization for sine solutions and speculates that the same approach applies to cosine solutions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the boundary conditions and normalization factors. There is no consensus on the implications of the wave function forms or the treatment of the sine and cosine solutions.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention the need for boundary conditions to be satisfied, but the discussion does not resolve the mathematical steps or assumptions involved in deriving the solutions.

MisterMan
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Hi, I am having trouble understanding an example from a textbook I am reading on the Schrödinger equation. The example deals with an infinite square well in one dimension. With the following properties:

V = 0\,where -a \leq x \leq a

V = \infty\,|x| \geq a

Where V is the potential.
The time-independent Schrödinger equation is given by this equation:

\frac{\hbar}{2m}\frac{d^2\psi}{dx^2} + E\psi = 0

where psi is:

\psi = Acos(kx) + Bsin(kx)

where k=\sqrt{\frac{2mE}{\hbar^2}}

and A and B are constants.

The boundary conditions in the book are said to be :

Acos(ka) + Bsin(ka) = 0
and
Acos(ka) - Bsin(ka) = 0

because we need to satisfy the Schrödinger equation when the potential is infinite when x is equal to plus or minus a.
The book then goes on to say:
Hence,
B = 0 and cos(ka) = 0 => k = \frac{n\pi}{2a} n=1, 3, 5,...
or
A = 0 and sin(ka) = 0 => k = \frac{n\pi}{2a} n=2, 4, 6,...

My question is this: Is psi equal to Aexp(ikx) in this example? In which case shouldn't the case of sin(ka) = 0 be irrelevant as A = 0? The solution to this equation is given in the book as:

\psi = \sqrt{\frac{1}{a}}cos(\frac{nx\pi}{2a}) for n odd

\psi = \sqrt{\frac{1}{a}}sin(\frac{nx\pi}{2a}) for n even

when |x| <= a and psi = 0 when |x| > a.

I hope I have made my problem clear, any help is appreciated.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
exp(ikx), exp(-ikx), sin(kx) and cos(kx) are all solutions of the time-independent equation (which can also be written as Hψ=Eψ). That set of four solutions isn't linearly independent, but any subset with exactly two members is. So to say that the general solution is of the form A sin(kx)+B cos(kx) is the same thing as saying that it's of the form C exp(ikx)+D exp(-ikx) or E sin(kx)+F exp(ikx). If you impose the boundary conditions on the second expression, you should get the same result as if you impose them on the first.

I'm not sure what you did to eliminate the sin solution. If you just add the two boundary conditions, you get the "B=0 and..." result, and if you subtract one of the boundary conditions from the other, you get the "A=0 and..." result.
 
Last edited:
You may solve the problem like this:
The solution of the equation can be written as the superposition of e^{ikx} and e^{-ikx}, then,
\phi=Ae^{ikx}+Be^{-ikx}
In terms of the boundary condition,
0=Ae^{ika}+Be^{-ika}
0=Ae^{-ika}+Be^{ika}
These are two equations on two variables A and B. A and B mustn't be 0 at the same time because it will lead to \phi \equiv 0. And this means we can not find the particle in the Well. It evidently violates the \int \mid \phi \mid ^{2} dx=1!
In order to satisfy the condition, the determinant of the coefficents before A and B must be 0. So, we can get sin(2ka)=0. It means sin(ka)=0 orcos(ka)=0. Or we can rewrite ka=\frac{n\pi}{2}. Substituting it into the two equation, you can get the result.
 
Hello, I am stuck on exactly the same problem so I thought rather than make a whole new thread Id ask here.

I understand (I think) the sines and cosines for different eigenfunctions with different n values...but I am not sure how to get the 1/SQRT (a) factor. Is this the normalisation factor or am I totally up the wrong path? it would be a great help if someone could show me how to do it
 
Yes, that is from the normalization factor. When you compute the integral between [-a,a] of sine squared, you get the <A> factor as 1/sqrt{a}.
 
PianoDentist said:
Hello, I am stuck on exactly the same problem so I thought rather than make a whole new thread Id ask here.

I understand (I think) the sines and cosines for different eigenfunctions with different n values...but I am not sure how to get the 1/SQRT (a) factor. Is this the normalisation factor or am I totally up the wrong path? it would be a great help if someone could show me how to do it

dont worry I got it. well I did it for the sin parts anyway. I am guessing doing it for the cos solutions gives same result
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K