Simple exponential multiplication (electron interfernce)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving how the interference of two electrons traveling in opposite directions affects their probability in free space. The initial equations for the wave functions of the electrons are provided, leading to a total wave function expressed as a sum of exponentials. The confusion arises in transitioning from the product of the wave functions to the cosine form. The solution involves using Euler's formula to simplify the sum, revealing that the imaginary components cancel out, leaving only the real cosine terms. The clarification highlights the importance of recognizing and applying fundamental mathematical identities in quantum mechanics.
Moonspex
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Briefly, the question asks to prove how the interference of 2 electrons (travelling in opposite directions as 1-D waves) would affect the probability of finding each electron in free space. My issue has to do with the first step in the solution.


Homework Equations



\Psi_{1} = \Psi_{0} e^{jkx}
\Psi_{2} = \Psi_{0} e^{-jkx} (Note change in direction)

Hence the interference of these two functions will be given by their sum:
\Psi_{total} = \Psi_{0} e^{jkx} \Psi_{0} · e^{-jkx} (i)
\Psi_{total} = 2\Psi_{0} cos (kx) (ii)


The Attempt at a Solution



I just don't understand how to get (ii) from (i)... thanks for looking!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A correction (You put a multiplication sign instead of an addition one. I think that was your mistake):

\Psi_{total}=\Psi_0(e^{jkx}+e^{-jkx})
Use Euler's formula, and just see that the imaginary sine terms cancel, while the real cosine terms add up.

e^{i\theta}=\cos \theta + i\sin \theta
 
Ah I see! I tend to forget simple steps like that which involve such simple identities. Thanks!
(PS: That was a typo on my part)
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top