Symmetric, antisymmetric and parity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sacroiliac
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Parity Symmetric
Sacroiliac
Messages
12
Reaction score
1
Problem 5.5 In David Griffiths “Introduction to Quantum Mechanics” says:

Imagine two non interacting particles, each of mass m, in the infinite square well. If one is in the state psin and the other in state psim orthogonal to psin, calculate < (x1 - x2) 2 >, assuming that (a) they are distinguishable particles, (b) they are identical bosons, (c) they are identical fermions.

(a) a2 [1/6 – 1/(2*pi2)(1/n2 + 1/m2)

(b) The answer to (a) - (128*a2*m2n2) / pi4(m2 - n2) 4

But this last term is present only when m,n have opposite parity.

(c) The answer to (a) plus the term added in (b) with the same stipulation as in (b)

What does this mean? It seams to be saying that all three particles would have the same separation unless their states have opposite parity. Is this correct? Bosons and Fermions would have the same separation unless their states have odd parities? I never heard of this before, how does this work?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bosons, fermions, and distinguishons ?

Hi,

The way to solve the problem goes as follows:
if the particles are distinguishable, then the wave function is psi_n(x1) psi_m(x2). If they are fermions, then you have to use the antisymmetric form: 1/sqrt(2) (psi_n(x1) psi_m(x2) - psi_n(x2)psi_m(x1))

and if they are bosons, then you have to use the symmtric form:
1/sqrt(2) (psi_n(x1) psi_m(x2) + psi_n(x2)psi_m(x1))

This for the technical part. Now the interpretational part is more difficult, and the effects are called "exchange effects" But in general, fermions tend to "repulse" each other and bosons tend to "attract" each other. But not with a term in the hamiltonian, but purely through these exchange effects.

cheers,
Patrick.
 
In case anyone's interested...

I finally found the answer to this question in Quantum Physics of Atoms molecules etc. by Eisberg and Resnick on page 315.

I'd try to explain it but I don't think I can pull it off.
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
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...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Back
Top