Visualising Potential Wells in Two Body Systems

Xander314
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I am currently working through Griffiths' textbook on quantum mechanics. The hydrogen atom was first modeled as a one body system with the proton fixed at the origin. In this case the potential was given by Coulomb's law,
V(r) = -\frac{e^2}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{1}{r} \ ,
where r is the radial coordinate.

This potential is easy to visualise as a "potential well" -- at least in two dimensions -- with the proton at the centre with V=-∞ and then the potential approaching 0 as r goes to ∞.

However, the hydrogen atom is then reconsidered as a multi body problem with the motion of the proton now accounted for. The positions of the particles are given by r1 and r2, and I understand the change into new coordinates: the separation distance r and the centre of mass R.

My question is this: how can the potential
V(\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2) = V(\vec{r}_1-\vec{r}_2) = V(\vec{r}) = V(|\vec{r}|) = -\frac{e^2}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{1}{r}
now be visualised as a potential well. Can this only be done in some kind of 2n-dimensional "configuration space" (where n is the number of space dimensions) of tuples
(\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2) \ ?

Also, what is the interpretation of a general multi body potential
V = V(t,\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2,\ldots,\vec{r}_m) \ ?
Is this the total potential energy of the system at time t when particle 1 is at position r1, particle 2 is at position r2 and so on?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Xander314 said:
However, the hydrogen atom is then reconsidered as a multi body problem with the motion of the proton now accounted for. The positions of the particles are given by r1 and r2, and I understand the change into new coordinates: the separation distance r and the centre of mass R.

My question is this: how can the potential
V(\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2) = V(\vec{r}_1-\vec{r}_2) = V(\vec{r}) = V(|\vec{r}|) = -\frac{e^2}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\frac{1}{r}
now be visualised as a potential well. Can this only be done in some kind of 2n-dimensional "configuration space" (where n is the number of space dimensions) of tuples
(\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2) \ ?

Well, in the two-body case since the potential only depends on the separation vector ##\vec{r}##, you can visualize it in the 3D space that ##\vec{r}## lives in. In general though, you are right: when you have ##n## particles the potential is a function of ##3n## spatial coordinates, and so becomes much harder to visualize. Note that the wave function also depends on ##3n## spatial coordinates, so when you have many particles you can no longer visualize the wave function as a wave propagating in real space. Instead it is a wave in configuration space.

Xander314 said:
Also, what is the interpretation of a general multi body potential
V = V(t,\vec{r}_1,\vec{r}_2,\ldots,\vec{r}_m) \ ?
Is this the total potential energy of the system at time t when particle 1 is at position r1, particle 2 is at position r2 and so on?

Yes.
 
Thanks for the help!
 
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Back
Top