The state of two identical bosons

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Wuberdall
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bosons State
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the normalization of the two-particle state of identical bosons in quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of different normalization factors and the correct formulation of the wave function for multiple bosons in various states.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the two-particle state for two identical bosons in different single-particle states and questions the normalization of the resulting wave function.
  • Another participant suggests that renormalization of the wave function is always possible and necessary for unitary norm.
  • A participant expresses confusion regarding the normalization factor of \(\frac{1}{\sqrt{N!}}\) for \(N\) identical bosons, noting it applies when bosons occupy different states.
  • Another participant provides a more general expression for the two-particle state, emphasizing the importance of normalization in the context of identical bosons.
  • A later reply confirms that the provided expression gives the correct normalized wave function, while noting that some factors may have been omitted in lecture notes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need for normalization of the wave function, but there are differing views on the specific factors involved and their application in different scenarios.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the normalization factors and their dependence on the occupancy of single-particle states by the bosons. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the best approach to normalization.

Wuberdall
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Hi PF.
If I have two identical bosons, one in the single-particle state [itex]\phi_{a}(x)[/itex] and the other in the single-particle state [itex]\phi_{b}(x)[/itex], the two-particle state of the system would then be :

[itex]\psi(x_{1},x_{2}) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\big(\phi_{a}(x_{1})\phi_{b}(x_{2}) + \phi_{b}(x_{1})\phi_{a}(x_{2})\big)[/itex]

right ?
Then if both bosons are in the same single-particle state, say [itex]\phi_{a}(x)[/itex], then the two-particle state according the equation above, would be :

[itex]\psi(x_{1},x_{2}) = \sqrt{2}\phi_{a}(x_{1})\phi_{a}(x_{2})[/itex]

But this two-particle state isn't normalized, due to factor of [itex]\sqrt{2}[/itex].
I can't see were I go wrong, someone who can help ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's not an issue. You can always renormalize the wave function. All the wave functions must have unitary norm
 
Thanks Einj, that helped a lot.
I just found it strange that my textbook would write the normalization factor as [itex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{N!}}[/itex], for N identical bosons.. But this only seems to be the case where the bosons isn't occupying the same single-particle state.

It would be more accurate/general to write the two-particle state as :[itex]\psi(x_{1},x_{2}) = A\big(\phi_{a}(x_{1})\phi_{b}(x_{2}) + \phi_{b}(x_{1})\phi_{a}(x_{2})\big)[/itex].

And again thanks :-)
 
Yes indeed. If I remember correctly the right normalization for a bosonic wave function is:
$$
\Psi(x_1,...,x_N;\alpha_1,...,\alpha_N)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N!\prod_{k=1}^N n_k!}}\sum_{\sigma}\sigma\left(\phi_{\alpha_1}(x_1)\phi_{\alpha_2}(x_2)\cdots \phi_{\alpha_N}(x_N)\right),
$$
where [itex]\sigma[/itex] are all the possible permutations and [itex]n_k[/itex] is the number of bosons in the same state [itex]\alpha_k[/itex].

I hope I'm not missing anything, but that was the main idea.
 
Yes, exactly... This gives the correct normalized wavefunction I was looking for. The lecture notees I'm reading has just dropped the factor of [itex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{\Pi_{k=1}^{N}n_{k}!}}[/itex].

Enjoy the rest of your day :-)
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K