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

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Isaac0427
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the equation for a particle's wave function, specifically the relationship expressed as ##\nu = E/h##. Participants explore the implications of this equation in the context of energy, mass, and wave functions, touching on concepts from both classical and quantum physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why the equation for total energy is expressed as ##E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (hv)^2## instead of ##E = mc^2 + hv##, suggesting a misunderstanding of how energy components relate.
  • One participant compares the energy equation to the Pythagorean theorem, indicating that ##E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2## is an application of this theorem in spacetime.
  • Another participant clarifies that the metric in spacetime differs from that in three-dimensional space, which affects how energy and momentum are related through the equation.
  • There is a challenge regarding the interchangeability of ##h\nu## and ##pc##, with some asserting that this is only valid for massless particles.
  • Participants discuss the meaning of "v" in the context of the equation, with clarification that it refers to frequency (##\nu##) rather than velocity.
  • A specific example of a particle's wave function is provided, illustrating how the frequency is derived from the energy using the equation ##\nu = E/h##.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct formulation of energy equations and the interchangeability of terms, indicating that multiple competing views remain without consensus on certain aspects.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the importance of distinguishing between massless and massive particles in the context of energy equations, and there are unresolved questions about the implications of spacetime metrics on these equations.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying quantum mechanics, wave-particle duality, and the mathematical formulations of energy in physics.

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   Reactions: 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   Reactions: 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   Reactions: 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##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
814
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K