Why does only e^ikx+Re^-ikx solve the TISE for a potential step?

  • Thread starter Thread starter timn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Potential
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the time-independent Schrödinger equation for a potential step, specifically where the potential is zero for x<0 and a constant V_0 for x>0. Participants explore the implications of the wave function solutions in these regions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand why only certain forms of the wave function are considered valid solutions in the context of a potential step. They question the implications of the wave function's form and its relation to probability flux. Other participants discuss the physical interpretation of the wave function and the significance of momentum eigenstates.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, clarifying concepts related to wave functions and their physical interpretations. Some guidance has been offered regarding the nature of the solutions and the application of boundary conditions, though multiple interpretations of the wave function's behavior are still being explored.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of missing assumptions or constraints that participants are grappling with, particularly regarding the treatment of the wave function in different regions and the normalization of solutions.

timn
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Solve the time-independent Schrödinger equation in one dimension for a potential step, i.e. V(x) = 0 for x<0 and V(x) = V_0 for x>0.

Homework Equations



- \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \frac{d^2u(x)}{dx^2} + V(x)u(x) = Eu(x)

The Attempt at a Solution



Rewrite as (4-3)

<br /> \frac{d^2u(x)}{dx^2} + \frac{2m}{\hbar^2}( E - V(x) )u(x) =<br /> \frac{d^2u(x)}{dx^2} + k^2( 1 - V(x)/E )u(x) = 0<br />

Looking at x<0, i.e. V(x)=0:

<br /> \frac{d^2u(x)}{dx^2} + k^2u(x) = 0<br /> \Leftrightarrow u(x) = Ae^{ikx} + Be^{ikx}<br />

The derivation in my textbook claims, at this step:

gasiorowicz-p66.png


Is it implicit that all multiples of the suggested u(x) are solutions (for x<0)? Furthermore, from the paragraph on the probability flux, it looks like |R(x)| < 1. Why?

It seems like I'm missing some assumption. Why would the x<0 case be different from the case of a free particle?

Edit: I'm having a similar problem with x>0.

gasiorowicz-p67.png


Gasiorowicz talks about the waves having a direction. What is meant by this? Why is the term e^-iqx dismissed?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
im assuming here that you have done a previous course on wave physics?
ok in very simple terms, the solution describes an unbound particle moving in some direction with wavenumber k, where k is some vector in n-dimensions, describing the direction of the motion of the particle. if you look closely at your original equation:
−ℏ22md2u(x)dx2+V(x)u(x)=Eu(x)
u have a second derivative of a function on the left and on the right the same function with coefficient E-V. you know that V is positive or zero, so you will find that for an incoming particle upon the barrier (x=0) should E>V, then the solution will be an imaginary complex exponential. in this case your wavefunction u is not normalisable (find out why!) and hence you must describe the particle by a dirac-delta function.
so basically the only way the wavefunction will make physical sense is to say it is like a bullet moving on some well defined trajectory. hence you can assume the particles are like waves incident on some boundary, with some probability of reflection (R) and some probability of transmission (T) which should complement one another to give 1 (100%).
hope this will help
 
Last edited:
Thank you ardie, that makes it clearer.
 
If you apply the momentum operator
\hat{p}=\frac{\hbar}{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}
to the state ψ(x)=eikx, you get
\hat{p}\psi(x) = \frac{\hbar}{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}e^{ikx} = (\hbar k)\psi(x)
This tells you ψ(x) is a momentum eigenstate, where the momentum of the particle is equal to \hbar k.

In both regions, the general solution is of the form Aeikx+Be-ikx, which you can, in light of the above, interpret as particles moving in the positive direction and negative direction. Now it's essentially a matter of applying boundary conditions. In this particular problem, you're interested in what happens if a particle is incident on the potential step when coming from the left. You would expect a reflected wave, in the x<0 region, and a transmitted wave, in the x>0 region. Consequently, you keep both terms for x<0, one representing the incident wave and one representing the reflected wave. For x>0, you only have the transmitted wave, so you drop the e-ikx term.
 
Much clearer! Looking at the momentum makes it more concrete. Thank you very much.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K