Why do SHM solutions have no imaginary values?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter AdrianMay
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Shm
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of solutions to the simple harmonic oscillator (SHO) in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing why these solutions do not exhibit imaginary values. Participants explore the implications of complex wavefunctions, time evolution, and the characteristics of standing versus traveling waves.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Adrian questions whether the textbook solution for the simple harmonic oscillator truly has no imaginary values and speculates on the nature of complex components in wavefunctions.
  • One participant explains that the time-dependent wavefunction is inherently complex due to the factor exp(-iEt/hbar), but eigenstates can be expressed as real functions of position with a complex phase factor.
  • Adrian points out that in the case of a square well, the presence of exp(ip.x) suggests that there is no uniform phase at a given time, contrasting this with the harmonic oscillator.
  • Another participant notes that for square well solutions, real eigenstates can be constructed using sine and cosine functions, while traveling waves exhibit phase dependence on position.
  • Adrian proposes that standing waves, such as those in the SHO or square well, have phases that depend only on time, allowing for the extraction of real components.
  • A later reply supports Adrian's assertion about standing waves and discusses the role of time-reversal invariance in constructing real energy eigenfunctions, mentioning that spin-orbit coupling complicates this condition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the nature of wavefunctions and the implications of phase dependence. While there is some agreement on the characteristics of standing versus traveling waves, the discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific reasons for the absence of imaginary values in SHO solutions.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference time-reversal invariance and the influence of spin-orbit coupling, indicating that certain assumptions and conditions may affect the discussion of eigenstates and their properties.

AdrianMay
Messages
121
Reaction score
4
Hi all,

The textbook simple harmonic oscillator solution has no imaginary values. True or false? If true, why not? Most of the time you get something like XXX.exp[i(Et-p.x)].

I thought maybe it was a superposition of states such that the complex parts cancel, but in that case they'd both have the same energy and you'd probably mangle them into sum and difference form so as to get different eigenvalues.

Confused,
Adrian.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Due to the factor exp(-iEt/hbar) associated with time evolution, the full time-dependent wavefunction is always complex.

However, for a given time, an eigenstate can be written as a real function of position up to a complex phase factor. The reason for this has to do with time-reversal invariance.
 
OK that's helpful, but nevertheless, for a square well, even a snapshot at a given instant in time has exp(ip.x) in there (doesn't it?) so there's no moment at which it all has the same phase. That seems to be different for this harmonic oscillator and I don't see why.

Adrian.
 
AdrianMay said:
OK that's helpful, but nevertheless, for a square well, even a snapshot at a given instant in time has exp(ip.x) in there (doesn't it?) so there's no moment at which it all has the same phase. That seems to be different for this harmonic oscillator and I don't see why.

Adrian.

For a square well, it is sines and cosines. If we talk about free particles, however, it has the problem you've just pointed out. Still, since exp(ipx) and exp(-ipx) have the same energy, we can construct purely real eigenstates, which are cos(px) and sin(px).
 
So would I be right in saying that if the phase depends on position then it's a traveling wave, but for standing waves (SHO, square well or whatever) the phase only depends on time so you can factor it out leaving all the interesting stuff behind as real?

Adrian.
 
AdrianMay said:
So would I be right in saying that if the phase depends on position then it's a traveling wave, but for standing waves (SHO, square well or whatever) the phase only depends on time so you can factor it out leaving all the interesting stuff behind as real?

Adrian.

I think you are right. Still, whenever there is a time-reversal invariance, waves that travel forward and backward (with momentums p and -p) should have the same energy, so that we can make a purely real energy eigenfunctions by making suitable linear combinations of them.

Therefore, the most general condition for being able to construct a complete set containing only real eigenfunctions, is the time-reversal invariance, when there is no spin dependence in the Hamiltonian. If there is spin-orbit coupling, it is not necessarily true.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K