The difference btn positive and negative potential quantum well

ismaili
Messages
150
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



(a) Determine the reflectivity spectrum R(E) of a free particle of mass m reflected from an infinite jump V(x), where
V(x)=0 if x\leq0, V(x)=-\infty if x>0

The other similar problem is:
(b) Determine the energy levels of a particle of mass m confined to an infinite barrier U(x) of width L, where
U(x) = -\infty for x<0, x>L, U(x) = 0 for 0\leq x \leq L

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Actually, I can solve these problems. One just solves the Schrodinger equation and matches the boundary conditions at each area. But what I wondered is, how about if we change the problem from a negative potential to a positive potential? (i.e. change the -\infty in the problems to \infty)
I think the method to solve the problems are still the same, and the boundary conditions should be the same! So, the solutions would be the same if we change the potential from a bluff to a wall! But intuitively, the bluff and the wall are quite different.
Can anyone explain this physically to me? any ideas would be appreciated, thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ismaili said:

Homework Statement



(a) Determine the reflectivity spectrum R(E) of a free particle of mass m reflected from an infinite jump V(x), where
V(x)=0 if x\leq0, V(x)=-\infty if x>0

The other similar problem is:
(b) Determine the energy levels of a particle of mass m confined to an infinite barrier U(x) of width L, where
U(x) = -\infty for x<0, x>L, U(x) = 0 for 0\leq x \leq L

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Actually, I can solve these problems. One just solves the Schrodinger equation and matches the boundary conditions at each area. But what I wondered is, how about if we change the problem from a negative potential to a positive potential? (i.e. change the -\infty in the problems to \infty)
I think the method to solve the problems are still the same, and the boundary conditions should be the same! So, the solutions would be the same if we change the potential from a bluff to a wall! But intuitively, the bluff and the wall are quite different.
Can anyone explain this physically to me? any ideas would be appreciated, thanks!
Physically, the difference is that the particle is in different areas. First, remember that potential is always "relative" to some value. In the first problem, the potential is 0 for x\le 0, -\infty for x> 0. That means that the particle can only be found at x> 0 (the probability of it being found with x\le 0 is 0. If you were given that the potential is +\infty for x\le 0, 0 for x> 0, that would only change the "reference" and the solution would be exactly the same: the particle can only be found at x> 0.

If you were given either
1) potential 0 for x< 0 or x>L, -\infty for 0\le x\le L or
2) potential \infty for x< 0 or x> L, 0 for 0\le x\le L
then the particle can only be found between 0 and L for both problems.

In your second problem you have an infinite potential barrier between x= 0 and x= L. In that case, the particle can only be found at x< 0 or x> L. Where there is an infinite barrier, whether it is potential 0 as compared to a potential of -\infty or infinite potential as compared to potential 0, you cannot find the particle in the barrier.

You will probably start shortly on finite potential wells or barriers. In that case, the Schrodinger equation cannot be solved exactly and you will need to find approximate solutions, probably using the "WKB approximation". In that case, you can find the particle in the barrier or sides of the well. In fact, if the barrier is narrow enough the particle may be able to "tunnel" to the other side.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top