Seperation constant giving a harmonic dependence. (Seperation of variables)

xago
Messages
60
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/8970/bose.png

The Attempt at a Solution


I'm on part b) where it asks which separation constation gives a harmonic time dependence. From part a) I deduced the equation \frac{d^{2}T}{dt^{2}}\frac{1}{T} = a constant. I'm choosing the constant k^{2} and my question is does it matter if the constant is negative or positive? I have seen in textbooks that a positive constant gives the solution T(t) = Aexp(-kt) + Bexp(kt) whereas a negative one would be Acos(kt) + B sin(kt). Are both solutions equivalent or does only one of them give a harmonic time dependence (My guess would be the sin/cos one is the proper answer for this question.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
hi xago! :smile:
xago said:
… I have seen in textbooks that a positive constant gives the solution T(t) = Aexp(-kt) + Bexp(kt) whereas a negative one would be Acos(kt) + B sin(kt). Are both solutions equivalent or does only one of them give a harmonic time dependence (My guess would be the sin/cos one is the proper answer for this question.)

yes, you're right … harmonic has to be periodic, and only sin/cos will be periodic :smile:

(exp will be either runaway or decay :redface:)
 
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