Schrodinger's Equation: Reason for Acceptance?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter captain
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Schrodinger's equation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the acceptance of Schrödinger's Equation in quantum mechanics, exploring its theoretical foundations, experimental validations, and its relationship to classical physics. Participants examine the equation's implications, its applications, and the role of various physical principles in its acceptance.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the lack of a mathematical proof for Schrödinger's Equation and seek experimental support for its acceptance.
  • Others argue that the equation accurately describes the properties of the hydrogen atom and has been validated by numerous experiments.
  • It is suggested that Schrödinger's Equation is analogous to Newton's Second Law, with both being based on observational evidence rather than formal derivation.
  • Participants discuss the roles of the time-independent and time-dependent forms of the equation, noting that the latter is essential for describing scattering and decay processes.
  • Several participants list various phenomena and principles, such as the photoelectric effect and electron diffraction, that support the validity of Schrödinger's Equation.
  • There is a discussion about the inclusion of magnetic fields in Schrödinger's Equation, with some asserting that it can be incorporated through minimal coupling, while others clarify the role of potential energy in the equation.
  • It is noted that while magnetic forces are generally not conservative, certain interactions can still be described within the framework of Schrödinger's Equation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express both agreement and disagreement on various aspects of Schrödinger's Equation, including its foundational basis, the role of magnetic fields, and the implications of its different forms. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the necessity of mathematical proof versus experimental validation.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on specific interpretations of quantum mechanics and the nature of forces, which may not be universally accepted. The discussion also highlights the dependence on definitions related to potential energy and the treatment of magnetic interactions.

captain
Messages
163
Reaction score
0
can anyone tell me the reason why they came to accept this equation with no mathematical proof behind it/ was ther any experiment that supported this equation so that it held true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It gave the correct properties of hydrogen.
It gives correct results for thousands of other experiments.
 
Shrodinger's Equation is analogous to Newton's Second Law in classical physics.

There is no derivation of Newton's Second Law. It is based completely off our observations and experiments showing, directly or indirectly, that F=ma. The same is true for the Shrodinger Equation. Once we observed that matter had wave properties, the Shrodinger Equation was devised to describe those properties. The equation is accepted because experiments have shown that it, (or more generally, it's relativistic counterpart) it makes very accurate predictions. This is how physics works. The ultimate proof is not mathematical, but natural. You can have an amazing derivation for a given equation, but if it doesn't agree with nature, it is not physics.
 
i know that the time independent equation gives the eigenvalues and eigenstates for the energy, but what does the time dependent equation help you with (or does that violate the Schrödinger picture of quantum mechanics)?
 
Last edited:
Scattering and decay are described by the time dependent equation.
Your questions are 80 years late.
 
1)Heisenberg's uncertainity principle
2)Hydrogen atom spectrum
3)electron density in hydrogen atom
4)Properties of hydrogenic atoms.
5)Electromagnetic theory
6)Photoelectric effect
7)Electron diffraction
and the list is endless
 
i just want to confirm the fact that Schrödinger's equation didn't include magnetism because it could only be described by tensors
 
captain said:
i just want to confirm the fact that Schrödinger's equation didn't include magnetism because it could only be described by tensors

It's trivial to include an external magnetic field in Schrödinger's equation--just use minimal coupling... Schrödinger's equation is certainly valid in the presence of electromagnetic fields.
 
Schrödinger's equation doesn't include any specific kind of force explicitly. Forces come in by way of the potential energy function that is part of the SE. Any interaction that can be described in terms of a potential energy function can be used in the SE.

In general, the magnetic force is not conservative so there is no potential energy associated with it. However, the orientation of a magnetic dipole in a magnetic field does have a potential energy associated with it. By inserting this into the SE you can explain the Zeeman effect, for example (splitting of spectal lines in a magnetic field).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 143 ·
5
Replies
143
Views
12K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K