Step Down Potential Homework: Electron Beam Incident on V(x)

  • Thread starter Thread starter FunkyDwarf
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Potential
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a homework problem involving a beam of electrons interacting with a step potential defined as V(x) = 0 for x < 0 and V(x) = -V(nought) for x > 0. The key confusion is whether to assume E > V, given that the potential is negative, and how to handle cases where E is greater or less than V. Participants clarify that the incoming wave can be treated as having positive energy, and they emphasize the importance of applying boundary conditions and normalizing flux to find the reflection and transmission coefficients. The transmission coefficient is determined by the ratio of the amplitudes of incoming and outgoing waves. Overall, the discussion highlights the standard approach to solving quantum mechanics problems involving potential steps.
FunkyDwarf
Messages
481
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A beam of electrons with number density 10^15 electrons/m is incident from the left on the step potential energy

V(x) = 0 for x< 0 and
-V(nought) for x > 0
The constant is positive so its a step down

Homework Equations


Various exponential equations and equations for wavenumber K


The Attempt at a Solution


Ok the thing I am confused about here is as follows: can we assume that E > V? i mean i would have said yes because you can't have something with negative energy, but then again the potential is effectively negative so I am not sure. If there's the case of E>v and E<V do we split it up into two cases? namley one where a decay occurs in the area where V = 0 (i know normally this doesn't happen but i assume we consider it relative to its surrounding, ie a lower potential) and another case where all that happens is the wavenumber changes and you still have two sets of standing waves.

Also we are asked to find the reflection and transmission coefficients: will these simply be the amplitudes of the exponentials going in certain directions?

Thanks!
-G
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The incoming wave is coming from the V=0 side, so you can assume E>0. Put in your boundary conditions (no incoming wave from the right etc), normalize flux, match amplitude and derivatives at the boundary. Transmission coefficient is then the ratio squared of the amplitude of the incoming wave to the outgoing wave. This is pretty standard stuff.
 
This is pretty standard stuff.
Yeh great way to help my confidence, make me feel stupid. Thanks for the info.
 
FunkyDwarf said:
Yeh great way to help my confidence, make me feel stupid. Thanks for the info.

Sorry, guess what I meant to say is that it is easy to find references and detailed solutions to problems like this. I had to look one up to remind myself how the parts worked as well. Didn't mean to imply it was 'obvious'. Just 'standard'.
 
no worries
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Back
Top