Why Must the State of a Quantum SHM Particle Be of This Form?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the quantum mechanics of a particle in simple harmonic motion (SHM) and the form of its wave function. The original poster presents a problem regarding the state of a quantum particle, specifically how it can be expressed as a superposition of the ground and first excited states with equal probabilities of measuring energy levels.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of equal probabilities for energy measurements and the normalization condition for the wave function. Questions arise about the origin of the phase factor in the wave function and the meaning of complex coefficients in quantum states.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the mathematical formulation of the problem, questioning the assumptions about the coefficients in the wave function. Some have provided insights into the normalization of states and the significance of complex phases, while others seek clarification on these concepts.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on deriving the wave function's form based on the requirement for equal probabilities, and participants are encouraged to consider the implications of complex coefficients in their reasoning.

MichalXC
Messages
39
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



We know that a particle in SHM is in a state such that measurements of the energy will yield either [itex]E_0[/itex] or [itex]E_1[/itex] (and nothing else), each with equal probability. Show that the state must be of the form

[tex]\psi = \frac{1}{\sqrt2} \psi_0 + \frac{e^{i \phi}}{\sqrt2} \psi_1[/tex]

where [itex]\psi_[/itex] and [itex]\psi_1[/itex] are the ground and first excited state, respectively.

Homework Equations



For a Hamiltonian with discrete energy spectrum, the probability of measuring the particular eigenvalue associated with the orthonormalized eigenfunction [itex]f_n[/itex] is [itex]\mid c_n \mid ^2[/itex].

The Attempt at a Solution



Since we are just as likely to measure [itex]E_0[/itex] as we are to measure [itex]E_1[/itex], we know that the wave function must look like

[tex]\psi = c_1 \psi_0 + c_2 \psi_1[/tex]

where

[tex]\mid c_1 \mid ^2 + \mid c_2 \mid ^2 =1 \rightarrow \mid c_n \mid ^2 = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

I have no idea where the factor of [itex]e^{i \phi}[/itex] comes from in the final answer.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
In the equation, c2=[tex] \frac{e^{i \phi}}{\sqrt2}[/tex]. What's the square of the absolute value of c2?
 
ideasrule said:
In the equation, c2=[tex] \frac{e^{i \phi}}{\sqrt2}[/tex]. What's the square of the absolute value of c2?

[tex]\left| \frac{e^{i \phi}}{\sqrt{2}} \right| ^2 = \frac{e^{-i \phi}}{\sqrt{2}} \frac{e^{i \phi}}{\sqrt{2}} = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

But we are supposed to derive the equation.
 
MichalXC said:
[tex]\mid c_1 \mid ^2 + \mid c_2 \mid ^2 =1 \rightarrow \mid c_n \mid ^2 = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

It doesn't follow from the normalization that

[tex]\mid c_n \mid ^2 = \frac{1}{2},[/tex]

only that

[tex]|c_2|^2 = 1-|c_1|^2.[/tex]

Instead you should be able to conclude that [tex]\mid c_n \mid ^2 =1/2[/tex] from the requirement that [tex]\psi_1[/tex] and [tex]\psi_2[/tex] apply from equal probabilities. Can you write down an expression for the probability that a measurement on [tex]\psi[/tex] finds the state [tex]\psi_1[/tex]?

As for the single phase, you need to use the fact that rescaling a wavefunction represents the same physical state. Namely that

[tex]\alpha \psi~~\text{and} ~~\psi[/tex]

are equivalent. This let's us reduce the number of phases to one.
 
Right.

The sum of the [itex]\mid c_n \mid ^2[/itex]s equals 1 by normalization:

[tex]\mid c_1 \mid ^2 + \mid c_2 \mid ^2 =1[/tex]

Since [itex]\mid c_n \mid ^2[/itex] represents the probability that a measurement of energy would yield the corresponding eigenvalue, we know that (since [itex]E_0[/itex] and [itex]E_1[/itex] are equally likely) [itex]\mid c_1 \mid ^2 = \mid c_2 \mid ^2[/itex]. Or, making a substitution, that

[tex]\mid c_1 \mid ^2 = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

and

[tex]\mid c_2 \mid ^2 = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

What does it mean to take the square root of these quantities, since they are potentially complex? Intuitively, I feel like "an expression for the probability that a measurement on [itex]\psi[/itex] finds the state [itex]\psi_1[/itex]" is:

[tex]\psi = \frac{1}{\sqrt2} \psi_1 + \frac{1}{\sqrt2} \psi_2[/tex]

Could you explain more what you mean when you say "rescaling a wavefunction represents the same physical state"? Thanks!
 
Last edited:
MichalXC said:
What does it mean to take the square root of these quantities, since they are potentially complex? Intuitively, I feel like "an expression for the probability that a measurement on [itex]\psi[/itex] finds the state [itex]\psi_1[/itex]" is:

[tex]\psi = \frac{1}{\sqrt2} \psi_1 + \frac{1}{\sqrt2} \psi_2[/tex]

That's not the most general form that satisfies the requirements, precisely because the [tex]c_i[/tex] are complex. The point is that specifying [tex]|c_i|=1/\sqrt{2}[/tex] only tells you that

[tex]c_i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} e^{i\theta_i},[/tex]

where [tex]\theta_i[/tex] is an unspecified angle. This is because we can write any complex number as [tex]z=r e^{i\theta}[/tex], where [tex]r[/tex] is real and [tex]\theta[/tex] is an angle, and [tex]|e^{i\theta}|=1[/tex] for any [tex]\theta[/tex].

Could you explain more what you mean when you say "rescaling a wavefunction represents the same physical state"? Thanks!

Yes, the reason is that we really define the expectation value of an observable (in the state [tex]|\psi\rangle[/tex]) as

[tex]\langle A \rangle_\psi = \frac{ \langle \psi | A | \psi \rangle}{ \langle \psi | \psi \rangle }.[/tex]

When [tex]|\psi\rangle[/tex] is normalized, we ignore the denominator because it's just equal to one. But in general we can use the complete formula to show that in the state [tex]\alpha |\psi\rangle[/tex]

[tex]\langle A \rangle_{\alpha \psi} = \frac{ \langle \psi | \alpha^* A \alpha | \psi \rangle}{ \langle \psi | \alpha^* \alpha | \psi \rangle } = \frac{ |\alpha|^2}{|\alpha|^2} \frac{ \langle \psi | A | \psi \rangle}{ \langle \psi | \psi \rangle } = \langle A \rangle_\psi .[/tex]

Since this formula is true for all operators [tex]A[/tex], we find that any observable measured in the state [tex]\alpha |\psi\rangle[/tex] is the same as the measurement in the state [tex]|\psi\rangle[/tex]. Therefore we conclude that we have the freedom to rescale a quantum state by a number without changing the physical state that it corresponds to.

An important thing to note is that this property is precisely what allows us to take an arbitrary state and normalize it without changing the physics.
 
Nice! That all makes sense. Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K