Undergrad Why psi squared instead of psi?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kent davidge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Psi
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on why the absolute square of the wave function, |ψ|², is used to determine probabilities in quantum mechanics instead of just squaring the real part. It highlights that squaring the absolute value ensures conservation, as derived from the Schrödinger equation, while squaring only the real or imaginary parts does not maintain this property. The ability to interpret |ψ|² as a probability distribution relies on its non-negativity and the constancy of the integral over three-dimensional space. The discussion also notes that multiplying the wave function by a global phase does not affect physical outcomes. Overall, the absolute square is essential for a valid probability interpretation in quantum mechanics.
kent davidge
Messages
931
Reaction score
56
Why should we square the abs value of the wave function to get probabilities? Why don't just forget the imaginary part, and (in order to get positive values) square the real part of the function?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
If you take the Schrödinger equation as given, you can derive that the absolute square of the wave function is conserved but not the square of the real or imaginary part. (You can move around the real and imaginary parts by multiplying the wave function by a global phase ##e^{i \phi}## without changing anything physical.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes kent davidge
The possibility to interpret ##|\psi(t,\vec{x})|^2## as a probability distribution hinges on the fact that
$$\|\psi \|^2=\int_{\mathrm{R}^3} |\psi(t,\vec{x})|^2=\text{const}$$
due to the Schrödinger equation,
$$\mathrm{i} \partial_t \psi(t,\vec{x})=-\frac{\Delta}{2m} \psi(t,\vec{x}) + V(\vec{x}) \psi(t,\vec{x}).$$
Of course, also ##|\psi|^2 \geq 0## is also important for having a probability distribution.
 
  • Like
Likes kent davidge
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
586
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K