Picking the different solutions to the time independent Schrodinger eqaution The Next CEO of Stack OverflowSolving the time independent Schrodinger equation: Does a complex solution make sense?How does a complex wavefunction “hold” energy?Change of variable in harmonic oscillator time independent Schrodinger equationQuantum mechanics in electric fieldConstructing solutions to the time-dependent Schrödinger's equationProtocol for solving time independent Schrodinger equationScaling the Time Independent Schrodinger EquationMomentum in time independent schrodinger equationOn Griffith Quantum example 2.1: normalization of wave function in time.1D Time independent Schrodinger eq. with limit
Why did we only see the N-1 starfighters in one film?
At which OSI layer a user-generated data resides?
Why does the UK parliament need a vote on the political declaration?
BOOM! All Clear for Mr. T
How do you know when two objects are so called entangled?
How do we know the LHC results are robust?
Clustering points and summing up attributes per cluster in QGIS
What happens if you roll doubles 3 times then land on "Go to jail?"
Reduce array of object to totals by property object
If/When UK leaves the EU, can a future goverment do a referendum to join EU
Trouble understanding the speech of overseas colleagues
Can a caster that cast Polymorph on themselves stop concentrating at any point even if their Int is low?
Science fiction short story involving a paper written by a schizophrenic
What can we do to stop prior company from asking us questions?
Monthly twice production release for my software project
Is it ever safe to open a suspicious html file (e.g. email attachment)?
Is HostGator storing my password in plaintext?
If Nick Fury and Coulson already knew about aliens (Kree and Skrull) why did they wait until Thor's appearance to start making weapons?
What's the best way to handle refactoring a big file?
Opposite of a diet
Hindi speaking tourist to UK from India
How should I support this large drywall patch?
What benefits would be gained by using human laborers instead of drones in deep sea mining?
Customer Requests (Sometimes) Drive Me Bonkers!
Picking the different solutions to the time independent Schrodinger eqaution
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowSolving the time independent Schrodinger equation: Does a complex solution make sense?How does a complex wavefunction “hold” energy?Change of variable in harmonic oscillator time independent Schrodinger equationQuantum mechanics in electric fieldConstructing solutions to the time-dependent Schrödinger's equationProtocol for solving time independent Schrodinger equationScaling the Time Independent Schrodinger EquationMomentum in time independent schrodinger equationOn Griffith Quantum example 2.1: normalization of wave function in time.1D Time independent Schrodinger eq. with limit
$begingroup$
The time independent Schrodinger equation
$$-frachbar^22m fracd^2psidx^2+Vpsi = Epsi$$ can have many different solutions of $psi$ for a particular value of $E$.
For example, if we found a complex solution $psi(x)$ for a particular value of $E$, say $E_0$, we can write $psi(x)=a(x)+ib(x)$. Then $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ will also be solutions to the T.I.S.E with $E=E_0$. Furthermore $c_1a(x)+c_2b(x)$ will also be solutions with $c_1$ and $c_2$ being arbitrary constants.
I read that one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$. But does that mean all these different solutions represent the same physical state of a particle?
The expectation value of any dynamical variable $Q(x,p)$ is given by
$int psi^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)psi. $ How do we know for sure that $int a(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)a(x) $ and $int b(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)b(x)$ gives the same expectation values?
quantum-mechanics wavefunction schroedinger-equation
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The time independent Schrodinger equation
$$-frachbar^22m fracd^2psidx^2+Vpsi = Epsi$$ can have many different solutions of $psi$ for a particular value of $E$.
For example, if we found a complex solution $psi(x)$ for a particular value of $E$, say $E_0$, we can write $psi(x)=a(x)+ib(x)$. Then $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ will also be solutions to the T.I.S.E with $E=E_0$. Furthermore $c_1a(x)+c_2b(x)$ will also be solutions with $c_1$ and $c_2$ being arbitrary constants.
I read that one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$. But does that mean all these different solutions represent the same physical state of a particle?
The expectation value of any dynamical variable $Q(x,p)$ is given by
$int psi^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)psi. $ How do we know for sure that $int a(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)a(x) $ and $int b(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)b(x)$ gives the same expectation values?
quantum-mechanics wavefunction schroedinger-equation
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
$endgroup$
– Gert
Mar 23 at 0:18
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The time independent Schrodinger equation
$$-frachbar^22m fracd^2psidx^2+Vpsi = Epsi$$ can have many different solutions of $psi$ for a particular value of $E$.
For example, if we found a complex solution $psi(x)$ for a particular value of $E$, say $E_0$, we can write $psi(x)=a(x)+ib(x)$. Then $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ will also be solutions to the T.I.S.E with $E=E_0$. Furthermore $c_1a(x)+c_2b(x)$ will also be solutions with $c_1$ and $c_2$ being arbitrary constants.
I read that one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$. But does that mean all these different solutions represent the same physical state of a particle?
The expectation value of any dynamical variable $Q(x,p)$ is given by
$int psi^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)psi. $ How do we know for sure that $int a(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)a(x) $ and $int b(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)b(x)$ gives the same expectation values?
quantum-mechanics wavefunction schroedinger-equation
$endgroup$
The time independent Schrodinger equation
$$-frachbar^22m fracd^2psidx^2+Vpsi = Epsi$$ can have many different solutions of $psi$ for a particular value of $E$.
For example, if we found a complex solution $psi(x)$ for a particular value of $E$, say $E_0$, we can write $psi(x)=a(x)+ib(x)$. Then $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ will also be solutions to the T.I.S.E with $E=E_0$. Furthermore $c_1a(x)+c_2b(x)$ will also be solutions with $c_1$ and $c_2$ being arbitrary constants.
I read that one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$. But does that mean all these different solutions represent the same physical state of a particle?
The expectation value of any dynamical variable $Q(x,p)$ is given by
$int psi^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)psi. $ How do we know for sure that $int a(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)a(x) $ and $int b(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)b(x)$ gives the same expectation values?
quantum-mechanics wavefunction schroedinger-equation
quantum-mechanics wavefunction schroedinger-equation
edited Mar 23 at 2:56
Qmechanic♦
107k121981229
107k121981229
asked Mar 22 at 22:55
TaeNyFanTaeNyFan
54614
54614
$begingroup$
The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
$endgroup$
– Gert
Mar 23 at 0:18
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
$endgroup$
– Gert
Mar 23 at 0:18
$begingroup$
The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
$endgroup$
– Gert
Mar 23 at 0:18
$begingroup$
The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
$endgroup$
– Gert
Mar 23 at 0:18
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.
If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.
There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.
Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.
For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.
That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.
A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.
(I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.
Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).
The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.
The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
$$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
$$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
$$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
$$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
$$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
q.e.d.
The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f468127%2fpicking-the-different-solutions-to-the-time-independent-schrodinger-eqaution%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.
If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.
There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.
Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.
If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.
There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.
Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.
If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.
There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.
Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.
$endgroup$
In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.
If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.
There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.
Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.
answered Mar 22 at 23:29
ACuriousMind♦ACuriousMind
73.1k18130323
73.1k18130323
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.
For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.
For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.
For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.
$endgroup$
Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.
For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.
answered Mar 22 at 23:11
PieterPieter
9,22231536
9,22231536
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.
That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.
A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.
(I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.
That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.
A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.
(I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.
That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.
A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.
(I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)
$endgroup$
... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.
That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.
A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.
(I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)
answered Mar 22 at 23:12
Chiral AnomalyChiral Anomaly
12.7k21542
12.7k21542
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.
Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).
The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.
The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
$$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
$$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
$$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
$$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
$$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
q.e.d.
The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.
Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).
The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.
The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
$$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
$$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
$$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
$$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
$$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
q.e.d.
The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.
Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).
The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.
The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
$$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
$$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
$$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
$$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
$$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
q.e.d.
The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.
$endgroup$
For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.
Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).
The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.
The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
$$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
$$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
$$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
$$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
$$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
q.e.d.
The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.
answered Mar 24 at 20:41
Elio FabriElio Fabri
3,2651214
3,2651214
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f468127%2fpicking-the-different-solutions-to-the-time-independent-schrodinger-eqaution%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
$endgroup$
– Gert
Mar 23 at 0:18