Two-dimensional Schrodinger equation

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem involving the two-dimensional Schrödinger equation in the context of quantum mechanics, specifically related to calculating the speed of an ice-hockey puck based on its ground state energy.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to calculate the energy of the puck using the wave-equation solution to the Schrödinger equation, aiming to derive speed from energy. Some participants question the need to treat energy as a vector and seek clarification on the reasoning behind this approach.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring the original poster's reasoning and questioning the assumptions made regarding energy treatment. There is no explicit consensus yet, but guidance is being offered to clarify the thought process.

Contextual Notes

The problem involves quantum effects and the specific setup of the ice-hockey rink, which may impose constraints on the interpretation of the problem. The original poster's approach to the two-dimensional nature of the problem is also under scrutiny.

fkf
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


An ice-hockey puck has the weight 0.170 kg. The ice-hockey rink is 30x60 m. If no players are on the ice, what speed does the puck have due to the quantum effects (ground state)?

Homework Equations


The wave-equation solution to the Schrödinger equation is
ψ(x,y) = Asin(kx*x)sin(ky*y)

The Attempt at a Solution


Since we're talking about energies and ground state. I would like to calculate the energy and then the E = mv^2/2 to calculate the speed. But we're in two dimensions and given the solution above
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So what's specifically stopping you?
 
Since the energy is not a vector, I can't threat the energies as vectors and then calculate a given speed for x and y.
 
Why would you need to treat E as a vector? Please explain your reasoning on how you're thinking you need to solve this problem fully. Right now, you're just throwing out snippets that don't make sense and make it impossible to figure out what you're thinking.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K