Uncertainty principle, relating the uncertainty in position to the uncertainty

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics, specifically relating the uncertainty in position to the uncertainty in energy. The original poster attempts to prove the uncertainty principle using a specific formulation and questions its implications for stationary states.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the formulation of the uncertainty principle and its application to stationary states. There is an inquiry into why the principle may not provide useful information in these cases.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance by referencing the generalized uncertainty relation and encouraging the original poster to clarify their understanding of the topic. There is an exploration of different interpretations regarding the implications of the uncertainty principle for stationary states.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of adhering to forum guidelines and suggest reviewing relevant literature, indicating that additional context or constraints may be necessary for a deeper understanding of the problem.

ttiger654
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Prove the uncertainty principle, relating the uncertainty in position (A=x) to the uncertainty in energy ([tex]B=p^2/(2m + V)[/tex]):

[tex]\sigma x\sigma H \geq \hbar/2m |<P>|[/tex]

For stationary states this doesn't tell you much -- why not??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What have you done so far? Do you know the generalized uncertainty relation? Read the guidelines to this forum, please, and we'll be able to help more.
 
ttiger654 said:
Prove the uncertainty principle, relating the uncertainty in position (A=x) to the uncertainty in energy ([tex]B=p^2/(2m + V)[/tex]):

[tex]\sigma x\sigma H \geq \hbar/2m |<P>|[/tex]

For stationary states this doesn't tell you much -- why not??



solution-
[x,p2/2m+V]=1/2m[x, p2]+[x,V];

[x, p2]= xp2 − p2x = xp2 − pxp + pxp − p2x = [x, p]p + p[x, p].

using the equation [x,p]=ih{this is known as canonocal commutation relation}

[x, p2]= ihp + pih = 2ihp. and And [x, V ] = 0,
so [x,p2/2m+ V]=1/2m(2ihp) = ihp/m

The generalized uncertainty principle says, in this case,

σ2xσ2H≥{(1/2i)(ih/m)<p>}^2={h/2m<p>}^2⇒ σxσH ≥h/2m|<p>|. QED

For stationary states σH = 0 and p = 0, so it just says 0 ≥ 0.
 
for reference u can use {griffiths_d.j._introduction_to_quantum_mechanics__2ed.}
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
974
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K