Verifying Solutions of de Broglie Form of Schr. Eqn

  • Thread starter Thread starter UrbanXrisis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    De broglie Form
UrbanXrisis
Messages
1,192
Reaction score
1
I am to show that neither of the two wave functions \psi_1 (x,t) = M_1 e^{kx-\omega t} and \psi_2 (x,t) = M_2 e^{i(kx-\omega t)} solve the de Broglie form of Schr. Eqn:

-\frac{\hbar ^2}{2m} \frac{\partial ^2 \psi}{\partial x^2}=i \hbar \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}

for the first wave, i got:

-\frac{\hbar ^2}{2m} M_1 k^2 e^{kx-wt}=-i \omega \hbar M_1 e^{kx-\omega t}

for the second wave, i got:
\frac{\hbar ^2}{2m} M_2 k^2 e^{i(kx-\omega t)}= \omega \hbar M_2 e^{i(kx-\omega t)}

i was just wondering if I did these differentiation correct.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you did the differentiations correctly. I am confused by your task to show that neither function satisfies the Schrodinger equation when in fact both do as you have just shown
 
well, all I have to do is to show that they are not equal. Because if i simplify both of those equations, do not get the de Broglie relation of: \hbar \omega = \frac{\hbar ^2 k^2}{2m}
 
What do you mean...? You do get the deBroglie relation

p=\hbar k

and so E=\frac{p^{2}}{2m}

Daniel.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top