Why Does Griffith's Derivation of the Quantum SHO Use This Method?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Griffith's derivation of the quantum Simple Harmonic Oscillator (SHO) employs a method that begins with the asymptotic behavior of the wave function, represented as ψ=Ae-ε²/2. He then modifies this to ψ=h(ε)e-ε²/2, where h(ε) is presumed to have a simpler form than ψ(ε). This technique mirrors the Euler-Lagrange method of variation of parameters, where a simplified equation is solved first, and parameters are replaced with functions in the original equation. Resources such as Mathews & Walker provide limited insight into this approach, while Liboff and Mahan offer inadequate explanations regarding the differential equation solving method.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly the quantum Simple Harmonic Oscillator (SHO).
  • Familiarity with differential equations and their solutions.
  • Knowledge of asymptotic analysis in mathematical physics.
  • Basic comprehension of the Euler-Lagrange method and variational principles.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Euler-Lagrange method in detail to understand its application in solving differential equations.
  • Explore advanced quantum mechanics textbooks that cover the quantum SHO, such as "Quantum Mechanics: Concepts and Applications" by Nouredine Zettili.
  • Research asymptotic analysis techniques and their relevance in quantum mechanics.
  • Examine the role of creation and annihilation operators in quantum mechanics, particularly in solving the quantum SHO.
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in quantum mechanics, physicists interested in advanced mathematical methods, and educators seeking to clarify the derivation of the quantum Simple Harmonic Oscillator.

Aziza
Messages
189
Reaction score
1
In Griffith's derivation of the quantum SHO, he uses some funny math:

first he considers asymptotic behavior to get ψ=Ae-(ε^2/2)
then he 'peels off the exponential part' to say that ψ=h(ε)e-(ε^2/2)
then he hopes that h(ε) will have simpler form than ψ(ε)

I can kind of understand the first part, but I have no clue what he means by the second part, i don't understand the motivation for this step...given this ODE, i would not know to proceed this way.
and idk what reason we have to 'hope' that h(ε) will be simple, just from the above data.

I am not familiar at all with this method of solving differential equation and i cannot find any resource on it...does anyone know of a better explanation? everything i have found merely copies word for word griffith's derivation.

I also have liboff's and mahan's book and they are even worse at this explanation
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
This argument is very similar in nature to the Euler-Lagrange method of variation of parameters. Instead of solving the original equation, we first solve some simplified equation. Then we assume that the solution to the original equation should be the same, except some of what used to be constants (parameters) in the approximate solution are now functions. So we plug our guesswork into the original equation and obtain equations for the new functions, which we hope will be simpler than the original equation.
 
Mathews & Walker mentions this technique briefly, but I doubt you'll find their treatment any more satisfying.

Liboff doesn't even talk about solving the differential equation this way, so I'm not sure what you are referring to. He does look at the asymptotic behavior in his discussion of what the solutions should look like qualitatively, but to find the actual solutions, he uses an algebraic approach with the creation and annihilation operators.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
894
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K