Understanding the Quantum Mechanical Model for V = Infinity and V = kx2/2

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the energies and wave functions for a quantum mechanical model with potential V = infinity for x ≤ 0 and V = kx²/2 for x ≥ 0. Participants express confusion about how to approach the problem, particularly regarding the application of the Schrödinger equation in different regions. It is suggested to solve the equation separately for x < 0 and x > 0, then connect the solutions at x = 0. The relevant equations for a particle in a box and a harmonic oscillator are mentioned as potential tools for solving the problem. Overall, clarity on the expected format and methodology for the solution is sought.
hamilton5
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


What are the energies and wave functions for the quantum mechanical model where V = infinity for x less than or equal to 0 and V = kx2/2 for x greater than or equal to 0?


Homework Equations


1-D particle in a box E = (h2/8m)(n2/L2)

Harmonic Oscillator E = (v + 1/2)(h/2*pi)w


The Attempt at a Solution


Honestly, I had no clue where to start. This was the last problem on our first exam. I tried drawing what it would represent graphically but I'm not really sure what I was supposed to answer... Do I add the energies together? Wave functions? I'm not even sure what format our professor was looking for he didn't tell us...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Solve the Schrodinger equation in each region, x<0 and x>0, and then join the solutions at x=0.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top