Showing the expectation values of a system are real quantities

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around demonstrating that the expectation values of position and momentum in a one-dimensional quantum system are real quantities. For the position expectation value ⟨x⟩, the participant initially assumed a wave function but was advised that a specific wave function is not necessary for the proof. The focus shifted to using integration by parts to show that the momentum expectation value ⟨p⟩ is also real, with the hint provided to derive ⟨p⟩ as the complex conjugate of itself. The participant expressed confusion regarding the wave function and integration techniques, indicating a need for clarification on the approach to solving the problem. Ultimately, the conversation emphasizes the importance of using the correct wave function and integration methods to establish the reality of expectation values.
FisiksIdiot
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A one-dimension system is in a state described by the normalisable wave function Ψ(x,t) i.e. Ψ → 0 for x → ±∞.

(a) Show that the expectation value of the position ⟨x⟩ is a real quantity. [1]

(b) Show that the expectation value of the momentum in the x-direction ⟨p⟩ is a real quantity, too. Hint: using integration by parts and normalisability show that ⟨pˆx⟩ = ⟨p⟩∗. [4]


Homework Equations



1=N∫ψ*ψ.dx

<x>=∫ψ* xψ.dx over all space

<p>=∫ψ* -ih dψ/dx.dx over all space

The Attempt at a Solution



The difficult aspect of this for me is determining what the correct wave function is. Using the information given I assumed that the correct wave function was e-ax2/2 eiEt/h (where a/2 is an arbitrary constant) as it fits the above requirements (I could be wrong.)

However, upon normalising and calculating <x> and <p>, the values obtained will of course will be 0 and therefore real as my assumption was a symmetric wave function. This is all well and good, however the question explicitly states to use integration by parts to solve for <p>.

<p>=N∫(e-ax2/2 eiEt/h) -ih d/dx(e-ax2/2 e-iEt/h).dx over all space

which gave:

<p>=N iha∫xe-ax2.dx over all space

which cannot be integrated by parts as far as I understand-perhaps it can?. Have I got the wrong end of the stick somewhere in my thinking?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You wave function is incorrect. Do not plug it in until you have done the math. You do not even need a "test" wavefunction for part a.
 
Thanks for the prompt reply, but I don't quite follow. Could you clarify what you mean by 'not needing a wave function'? I feel I am approaching the problem from the wrong angle.
 
Hmm, perhaps forget what I mentioned previously. You simply need to reconsider your wave function. Perhaps try something of the form \psi = e^{\pm i(kx-E t/ \hbar)}. . .
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'
I can't figure out how to find the velocity of the particle at 37 degrees. Basically the bead moves with velocity towards right let's call it v1. The particle moves with some velocity v2. In frame of the bead, the particle is performing circular motion. So v of particle wrt bead would be perpendicular to the string. But how would I find the velocity of particle in ground frame? I tried using vectors to figure it out and the angle is coming out to be extremely long. One equation is by work...
Back
Top