Understanding Basic QM: Multiple Solutions, Tunneling & Normalization Explained

  • Thread starter ever.monk
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Qm
In summary: Then I am curious about the position operator, as i believe that is x times the wavefunction. I thought that you found the position by doing the whole absolute square integral thing. What is the different between these functions? What is it that they predict?The position operator acts on a wavefunction and gives a number: the position of the particle described by the wavefunction. The wavefunction itself is a function of both position and time, and gives the amplitude (or probability) of finding the particle at a given position at a given time. The absolute square integral gives the probability of finding the particle in a
  • #1
ever.monk
7
0
Im working through some basic QM problem for school, but sadly I am still in high school and none of my teachers have studied physics :frown: . So just curious about a few things:

Often for certain situations there are multiple (atleast in mathematic form) solutions to the schrödinger Eq. Are these all the same? eg.
Famous infinite potential well. 2 solutions are Psi=Asin(kx) but also powers of e are possible. When entirely normalized, etc, are they essentially the same probability distribution?

With tunneling, the wave function is shown to have a value in the V>E area. But this would mean that there is a possibility of finding it here, which is nonsense. If this probability would be disregarded, wouldn't this disturb the normalizing of the wavefunction? (the V>E would still be part of the normalization :S) This would the same with a finite potential well, as there are results for the wavefunction in V>E areas. How does normalizing work in these situations?

And one last question. Are wavefunctions are purely attained through solving things like the schrödinger equations, or can they also attained through other means?

It would help my understanding a lot of you help my out with this curiosities.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
ever.monk said:
Im working through some basic QM problem for school, but sadly I am still in high school and none of my teachers have studied physics :frown: . So just curious about a few things:

Often for certain situations there are multiple (atleast in mathematic form) solutions to the schrödinger Eq. Are these all the same? eg.
Famous infinite potential well. 2 solutions are Psi=Asin(kx) but also powers of e are possible. When entirely normalized, etc, are they essentially the same probability distribution?

There's a different solution for each eigenvalue of the Schrödinger equation. The eigenvalues in this case are the allowed energy levels for the particle in the well. And since the Schrödinger equation is a linear equation, any sum (superposition) of these solutions is also a solution. Any good QM book will do a better job of explaining this than I can.

With tunneling, the wave function is shown to have a value in the V>E area. But this would mean that there is a possibility of finding it here, which is nonsense.

It sure seems like nonsense, but that's the way the world works.

And one last question. Are wavefunctions are purely attained through solving things like the schrödinger equations, or can they also attained through other means?

They can be computed numerically, as long as you also maintain the requirement that the integral of the squared modulus of the wave function converges. For an example of this, see the book Basic Concepts of Physics by Chalmers Sherwin. A reasonably large university library should have this book.
 
  • #3
Daverz said:
It sure seems like nonsense, but that's the way the world works.

Rather than leave it with that flip response, here's the Wikipaedia entry on quantum tunneling, where you can see that there are technologies, like the scanning tunneling microscope, that depend on the reality of quantum tunneling.
 
  • #4
i get the tunnelung part, as that's beyond the V>E part where it turns E>V again, but if there was a chance of finding the particle in the "hill" as its usually called, that would kinda violate any conservation of energy. That what I am wondering about.

and as my math isn't what it should be, what is an eigenvalue exactly?
 
Last edited:
  • #5
ever.monk said:
i get the tunnelung part, as that's beyond the V>E part where it turns E>V again, but if there was a chance of finding the particle in the "hill" as its usually called, that would kinda violate any conservation of energy. That what I am wondering about.

Don't worry too much about that. As long as the particle is in an energy eigenstate, it does have indeed a finite amplitude to be in "the forbidden zone". However, this is not a probability. In order to turn this into a probability, you need to do a measurement. Now, we are touching here upon the delicate and ununderstood part of quantum theory: the "measurement problem". There are different views on this, all have their problems and advantages. But let us not go into that for the moment.
What needs to be done to turn this amplitude into an observation "the particle is in this forbidden zone" is in any case an interaction with a measurement apparatus, and the energy will come from this interaction with the measurement apparatus.

and as my math isn't what it should be, what is an eigenvalue exactly?


For a linear operator O, if you find a vector v such that:
O(v) = lambda . v
(most of the time that's not so!), then lambda is an eigenvalue of the operator O.
 
  • #6
thanks, that helps a lot!

So for the operator of energy for example. After you "apply" it you just have to algebra the wavefunction lose again and the value that it is multiplied with is then the function for the property of that operator, if i understand correctly how that works.

Then I am curious about the position operator, as i believe that is x times the wavefunction. I thought that you found the position by doing the whole absolute square integral thing. What is the different between these functions? What is it that they predict?
 
Last edited:
  • #7
ever.monk said:
thanks, that helps a lot!

So for the operator of energy for example. After you "apply" it you just have to algebra the wavefunction lose again and the value that it is multiplied with is then the function for the property of that operator, if i understand correctly how that works.

Yes. A strange way of stating it, but yes.
Now, notice that most functions do not have this property! (for a given operator). These are then functions that describe states that do not have a well-defined value for the quantity the operator stands for. It's the entire mystery of quantum theory, in a nutshell: the fact that there exist (many) states that do not have well-defined values for measureable quantities (and which are NOT statistical ensembles, no matter what one can sometimes read).

In fact, the entire formalism of QM has been explicitly constructed that way: that if you have a state, S1, that gives you a certain value a1 for a given quantity, say, A, and a state S2 that gives you another value a2 for A, that you can also have states (the superpositions of states S1 and S2) such that we do not have a well-defined value for A, and that upon measuring A, we have a certain probability to observe a1, and another probability to observe a2. But, again, the "superposed state" is NOT a statistical ensemble.

In my example, the state (the wavefunction f1 describing the state) S1 would then be an eigenfunction of the operator A, with eigenvalue a1 ; and the state (the wavefunction f2 describing the state) S2 would then be an eigenfunction of A with the eigenvalue a2.
In other words: A f1 = a1.f1 and A f2 = a2. f2

But clearly, a general state f = u.f1+ v.f2 (with u and v complex numbers), which is a superposition of the states S1 and S2, is not an eigenfunction of A:

A f = A(u.f1 + v.f2) = u.a1.f1 + v.a2.f2 is NOT some number times f.

It turns out (and that's the big mystery), that such a state, when we measure the quantity A (and only then), gives us, with probability |u|^2 a result equal to a1, and with probability |v|^2 a result equal to a2. Afterwards (once we have the result), if we had a1, we can now say that the state is well-described by the function f1 (and hence the state S1) (or S2 if we had a2 as a result).

But it is an error to think that the state f was a statistical mixture of the states S1 and S2, because we can do other measurements on that state which make this come out wrong.

Then I am curious about the position operator, as i believe that is x times the wavefunction. I thought that you found the position by doing the whole absolute square integral thing. What is the different between these functions? What is it that they predict?

It is exactly the same !
The position operator has as eigenfunction for the state "particle is in position x0" the wavefunction delta(x-x0) (Dirac delta).

X delta(x-x0) = x0 delta(x-x0).


Now, your general wavefunction psi(x) = integral psi(x0) delta(x-x0) dx0.

So you can see this psi(x) as a superposition of delta(x-x0), delta(x-x1)...
with coefficient (as was the u and v above) psi(x0), psi(x1) ...

If you now measure the position (and only if you do!), then you will observe one of the possible eigenvalues x0, with probability, the coefficient of the eigenfunction, squared, which is here |psi(x0)|^2.
 
  • #8
just came across another strange something. In this book I am working out of, they start introducing the 3D inf-V well, but the formula they show is En=(h^2)/(8mL^2) x (nx^2 + ny^2 + nz^2). I was wondering what L is, as there are 3 spatial dimensions?? Would love an explanation :D.
 
  • #9
That formula is for a cubical box, with all sides the same length. For a rectangular box with unequal sides, I think it's

[tex]E_n = \frac{h^2}{8m} \left( \frac{n_x^2}{L_x^2} + \frac{n_y^2}{L_y^2} + \frac{n_z^2}{L_z^2} \right) [/tex]
 
  • #10
thats makes a bit more sense, thanks
 
  • #11
one more thing which has been puzzling me constantly, is what those accents and strange symbols on top of most of the symbols (like E, p etc) are? If I am not mistaken they are unneccesary...
 
  • #12
No, they're not. They're used to distinguish operators from scalars.

Daniel.
 

Related to Understanding Basic QM: Multiple Solutions, Tunneling & Normalization Explained

1. What is the meaning of multiple solutions in basic quantum mechanics?

Multiple solutions in basic quantum mechanics refer to the fact that there can be more than one possible outcome for a given measurement or observation. In quantum mechanics, the state of a system is described by a wave function, which can have multiple values at different points in space. This means that there can be multiple solutions for the possible states of a system, leading to multiple possible outcomes.

2. What is tunneling in quantum mechanics?

Tunneling in quantum mechanics refers to the phenomenon where a particle can pass through a potential barrier that it classically should not be able to cross. This occurs due to the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics, where a particle has a small but non-zero chance of appearing on the other side of a barrier, even if it does not have enough energy to overcome the barrier classically.

3. How does normalization work in quantum mechanics?

Normalization in quantum mechanics is a mathematical process that ensures the total probability of all possible outcomes for a system adds up to 1. This is achieved by dividing the wave function by a normalization constant, which is the square root of the integral of the wave function squared over all possible states. Normalization allows us to interpret the wave function as a probability distribution for the possible states of a system.

4. Can multiple solutions and tunneling occur simultaneously in a quantum system?

Yes, multiple solutions and tunneling can occur simultaneously in a quantum system. In fact, tunneling is one of the ways that multiple solutions can manifest. A particle can tunnel through a potential barrier, leading to multiple possible outcomes for its position and momentum. This is a key feature of quantum mechanics and is not possible in classical physics.

5. How does understanding basic quantum mechanics impact our understanding of the universe?

Understanding basic quantum mechanics is crucial for understanding the behavior of particles at a microscopic level. It has led to groundbreaking discoveries and technologies, such as transistors and lasers, and has revolutionized our understanding of the fundamental laws of nature. It also challenges our classical intuition and forces us to rethink our understanding of reality, leading to new philosophical and scientific debates. Ultimately, understanding basic quantum mechanics is essential for advancing our knowledge of the universe and its workings.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
80
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top