Which Method Should Be Used to Calculate Energy in Standing Wave Formalism?

Adhip
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



If you have seen the treatment of calculation of density of states using standing wave formalism in Modern Physics by Arthur Beiser,
their are these observations of which i am not completely convinced,

with wavelength fixed, he transforms wavelength into energy, using firstly debroglie's equation to transform lamda into momentum. And then momentum sq= 2mE, to get E.

The question is if we are using QM , why shouldn't we just transform lamda into frequency, and then directly using hv get energy.

The two give diverse results. Where am I missing the logic?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your post is not written very well, but I think I may understand you. You can transform wavelength into frequency. My question is, how did you do this? Matter waves and light waves are different. They have different dispersion relations.
 
well, zachzach, thanks for the reply, i will reformulate it in clearer terms..

what we are doing is calculation of density of states in a box, which comes from the blackbody radiation and also can then be imagined to be particles in a box as quantum mechanically, particles in a box has standing wave solutions.

Now, same values of energy , momentum , or wavelength can be taken up by different combinations of quantum numbers describing the wave function.

Now,

nx2 + ny2 + nz2 = (2L/\lambda)2

where L is the dimension of the box.

Density of states is given by the number of unit n volume in a shell of radius given by 2L/\lambda.

Now lamda can be changed into frequency, which he does using dispersion relation for light, ie c=\lamda*\nu

Next we convert this into energy, for this their can be two possibilities

1) E= h\nu
2) straight from debroglie , get \lambda changed to p
and then p2= 2mE to get E.

which and why?
 
To solve this, I first used the units to work out that a= m* a/m, i.e. t=z/λ. This would allow you to determine the time duration within an interval section by section and then add this to the previous ones to obtain the age of the respective layer. However, this would require a constant thickness per year for each interval. However, since this is most likely not the case, my next consideration was that the age must be the integral of a 1/λ(z) function, which I cannot model.
Back
Top