Why is the equation for a particle's wave function given by ##\nu = E/h##?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Isaac0427
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The equation for a particle's wave function, given by ν = E/h, stems from the relationship between energy and frequency in quantum mechanics. The discussion clarifies that E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2 is an application of the Pythagorean theorem in spacetime, where time has a different metric than space. It emphasizes that the invariant mass "m" is derived from the energy and momentum 4-vector, with the negative sign in the metric affecting calculations. Additionally, the term "ν" refers to frequency, not velocity, and is essential for understanding a particle's wave function. This highlights the importance of distinguishing between different physical quantities in relativistic contexts.
Isaac0427
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
718
Reaction score
163
I understand that E=mc^2 and E=hv can't be used to set mc^2 equal to hv, but why would the total equation be E=(mc^2)^2+(hv)^2 instead of E=mc^2+hv? I'm sorry if this question is stupid.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why is the Pythagorean theorem ##c^2 = a^2 + b^2## instead of ##c = a + b##? That's just how space works.

##E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2## is just an application of the Pythagorean theorem in spacetime.
 
  • Like
Likes Isaac0427
Khashishi said:
Why is the Pythagorean theorem ##c^2 = a^2 + b^2## instead of ##c = a + b##? That's just how space works.

##E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2## is just an application of the Pythagorean theorem in spacetime.
Ok, thanks. By the way, what is the difference between pc and hv? I see them used interchangeably.
 
Ok, I gave a misleading answer and I think I need to address it. Space-time has a different metric than space, and Pythagorean theorem works differently. In familiar 3D, the metric is ##dr^2 = dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2## so Pythagorean theorem is as above.
But in 4D space time, time has an opposite sign to space, so the corresponding metric is ##ds^2 = -dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2## or ##ds^2 = dt^2 - dx^2 - dy^2 - dz^2## depending on the convention you adopt.

So you can rewrite ##E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2## as
##(mc^2)^2 = E^2 - (pc)^2##
##(mc^2)^2 = E^2 - (p_xc)^2 - (p_yc)^2 - (p_zc)^2##

The invariant mass "m" is the 4D length of the energy and momentum 4-vector. But length is calculated using something like the Pythagorean theorem but with negative sign in front of the momentum. This is a result of the negative sign in the metric. This is clearer if you drop all the c constants from the equation.
##m^2 = E^2 - p_x^2 - p_y^2 - p_z^2##
You can drop c if you measure length and time in compatible units. If you measure time in seconds, you should measure length in light-seconds, and then you can set c = 1 light-second/second and then make it go away.
 
  • Like
Likes Edward Hunia, Isaac0427 and fresh_42
You shouldn't be using ##h\nu## in this equation. It isn't correct to interchange ##h\nu## with ##pc## except for massless particles.
 
  • Like
Likes Isaac0427
Thank you.
 
Isaac0427 said:
why would the total equation be E=(mc^2)^2+(hv)^2

Who says it looks like that?
 
jtbell said:
Who says it looks like that?
My bad, I meant E^2
 
E=hv also for a massive particle.
 
  • #10
What is "v" here?
 
  • #11
Isaac0427 said:
My bad, I meant E^2

I was referring to the (hv)^2 part, not the E on the left which should indeed be E^2.

nasu said:
What is "v" here?

I'm pretty sure it's supposed to mean "nu" (##\nu##) for frequency, not "v" for velocity.
 
  • #12
##\nu##
 
  • #13
my2cts said:
E=hv also for a massive particle.
What do you mean?
 
  • #14
A particle's wave function has a time-dependent part whose frequency is given by ##\nu = E/h##.

For example, a free particle has ##\Psi(x,t) = Ae^{i(px-Et)/\hbar} = Ae^{2 \pi i(px-Et)/h}## so the time dependent part is ##e^{-2 \pi i Et / h}##. One form of an oscillator in complex-number space is ##e^{-i \omega t} = e^{-2 \pi i \nu t}##. Compare the two, and you get ##\nu = E/h##.
 
Back
Top