I Spectrum energy of a particle moving on a circumference

Lola1
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
If you consider the one-dimensional case of a particle constrained to move on the edge of a circumference, the energy spectrum is continuous and two times degenerate. Why the fact that the particle can move in clockwise and counterclockwise implies that the spectrum is degenerate twice?
In any case thanks to the help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Moving clockwise and anticlockwise at the same absolute momentum has the same energy as it is symmetric. Two states with the same energy.
 
  • Like
Likes Lola1
Mathematically double degeneration is known by 2 that multiplies the exponents of the exponential solution? (Which we get by imposing the boundary conditions):
ψ (x) = α \exp (2i (nπ / L ) x) + β \exp (-2i (nπ / L) x)
 
Lola1 said:
Mathematically double degeneration is known by 2 that multiplies the exponents of the exponential solution?
I don't understand that sentence.

You can write down the general solution like that, but you can also let n be positive or negative, and of course you can always have superpositions of those solutions.
 
I meant that the two who multiplies the exponents indicates that the energy spectrum is degenerate twice...is it true? Furthermore if the energy spectrum is degenerate twice means that his energy levels are equally spaced (but with spacing that is En=(2n^2π^2)⋅(ħ^2)/mL^2 ,unlike the energy levels of the particle in a box where the levels are En=(n^2π^2)⋅(ħ^2)/mL^2 ) or are one double the previous one?
 
The 2 in the exponent is part of a factor (2pi), the circumference of a circle. It has nothing to do with multiplicities.

The difference between energy levels is independent of the multiplicities. It arises from the detailed structure of the potential, while the multiplicity is based on the symmetry. Every symmetric potential will have this multiplicity, but it can have different steps between the energy levels.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...
Back
Top