To get the complete Radial Wavefunction, why do we multiply by Y(l,m)?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the necessity of multiplying the radial eigenfunction by the spherical harmonics, ##Y_l^m##, to obtain the complete wavefunction in quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of this multiplication for forming a complete set of solutions, particularly in the context of the hydrogen atom and the time-independent Schrödinger equation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that a 3-dimensional wavefunction is required because physical objects move in three dimensions.
  • Others explain that the inclusion of spherical harmonics with the radial eigenfunctions is necessary to ensure the eigenfunctions form a complete set, which is derived from solving the 3D time-independent Schrödinger equation for the Coulomb potential.
  • A participant mentions that the complete radial function consists of parts corresponding to both discrete and continuous energy spectra, referencing specific formulas from Bethe and Salpeter.
  • One participant describes their attempt to calculate ##u_{n}^{l=n-2}## and expresses confusion over discrepancies between their results and those in the literature, indicating a potential issue in their derivation process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the necessity of spherical harmonics in forming a complete wavefunction, but there is disagreement regarding the specific calculations and results related to the wavefunctions, particularly for different values of n and l.

Contextual Notes

Some participants' calculations involve assumptions about the normalization and forms of the wavefunctions, which may not be fully resolved in the discussion. There are also references to specific mathematical steps that may depend on definitions or interpretations that are not universally agreed upon.

unscientific
Messages
1,728
Reaction score
13
Hi guys, I'm doing a quantum course at the moment, and there's one thing in Binney's book which I don't really understand:

Why must you multiply the radial eigenfunction by ##Y_l^m## to get the "complete wavefunction" ?

They do this to normalize the eigenfunction, and to do things like calculate mean energies and mean distance from the nucleus:

j12f6g.png
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Because you need a 3-dimensional wavefunction because objects move in 3 dimensions.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Because you need a 3-dimensional wavefunction because objects move in 3 dimensions.

Why does multiplying ##Y_l^m## to eigenfunction ##u_n## make it a 3-dimensional wavefunction?

The "1-D" eigenfunction is obtained by solving:

33c659v.png
 
You need the energy eigenfunctions to form a complete set. You need to include the spherical harmonics in the radial eigenfunctions in order to make sure these eigenfunctions do form a complete set. All of this just comes from solving the 3D time-independent Schrödinger equation for the Coulomb potential. What we do is use separation of variables to break the eigenvalue equation down into a radial equation, giving us the solutions you cited, and an angular equation that gives us spherical harmonics. In the end multiply the radial solutions and the spherical harmonics together to get the complete set of solutions just like for all separation of variables problems.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
The complete radial function is made up of 2 completely different parts, the part for the discrete energy spectrum and the part of the continuous energy spectrum. For a certain spectral value of the Hamiltonian, you can write down the full wavefunction of the H-atom as a product of the radial eigenfunction and the spherical harmonic. Check out formulas 4.12 and 4.13 of Bethe and Salpeter.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
WannabeNewton said:
You need the energy eigenfunctions to form a complete set. You need to include the spherical harmonics in the radial eigenfunctions in order to make sure these eigenfunctions do form a complete set. All of this just comes from solving the 3D time-independent Schrödinger equation for the Coulomb potential. What we do is use separation of variables to break the eigenvalue equation down into a radial equation, giving us the solutions you cited, and an angular equation that gives us spherical harmonics. In the end multiply the radial solutions and the spherical harmonics together to get the complete set of solutions just like for all separation of variables problems.

Thanks I got it. But when i try to calculate ##u_{n}^{l=n-2}##, something goes wrong:

Starting, we define operator A by:

[tex]A_{n-2} = \frac{a_0}{\sqrt 2}\left(\frac{i}{\hbar}p_r + \frac{1-n}{r} + \frac{Z}{(n-1)a_0}\right)[/tex]

Substituting ##p_r = -i\hbar (\frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \frac{1}{r})##:

[tex]A_{n-2} = \frac{a_0}{\sqrt 2}\left( \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \frac{2-n}{r} + \frac{Z}{(n-1)a_0}\right)[/tex]

Thus, we want to solve:

[tex]\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \frac{2-n}{r} + \frac{Z}{(n-1)a_0} \right) u_{n}^{l=n-2} = 0[/tex]

Solving by integrating factor method, we obtain:

[tex]u_n^{l=n-2} = A r^{n-2} e^{\frac{Z}{(n-1)a_0}r}[/tex]

Normalizing,

[tex]u_n^{l=n-2} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{[2(n-1)]!}} \left(\frac{2Z}{(n-1)a_0}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}} \left(\frac{2Z}{(n-1)a_0}\right)^{n-2} e^{-\frac{Z}{(n-1)a_0}r}[/tex]

This is similar to ##u_n^{l=n-1}##, simply replace n by n-1:

ajx85d.png


But when I substitute n = 2, so l = 0, I get ##u_2^0 = \frac{1}{\sqrt 2} \left(\frac{2Z}{a_0}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}} e^{-\frac{Z}{a_0}r}##

I get a completely different result from the book:

1ftl6a.png


I'm not sure what's wrong with my derivation?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K