Calculate the normalization constant A if the wavefunction is
Ψ ( x , t ) = A exp ( − 2 π ∣ x ∣ − i π t ) .
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
Any good introductory books for Quantum Mechanics?Because I'm terrible at this (and Physics in general) :D
Log in to reply
Check out Steven's introductory lecture in QM. It's got a list of books on QM.
Log in to reply
Thanks!By the way are you more if a physics person, or are you more inclined to maths?Because I am more fond of Pure Math like Number Theory,Algebra and sometimes Analysis
Log in to reply
@Bogdan Simeonov – Both equally! Physics says deep and meaningful things about the way the universe works and is the pillar for much of the advancements we find surrounding us today; mathematics is beautiful in its simplicity and complexity, is enigmatic, vast, overwhelming, and yet fantastic all at once.
I'm studying EM, a bit of QM, particle physics, and thermodynamics; as well as NT, algebra, topology, calculus, and analysis.
Log in to reply
@Jake Lai – Dayum, all that at once?Where do you study?How do you have time?Do you have any hobbies?Teach me master
Log in to reply
@Bogdan Simeonov – Hobbies? Music, piano and electronic music I guess, and some poetry/prose on the side; a bit of art... I'm beginning to realise I'm very hardcore >~<
I study whenever I have free time, and I sleep very little (you shouldn't sleep very little, it's a terrible habit). Don't stress yourself over trying to be the very best; just study concepts at your own pace, that's the way to do it!
One of the best books for Quantum is Shankar's Principle of Quantum Mechanics. But it may not be very introductory friendly. Griffiths is also a good book used frequently in colleges.
Griffiths "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" is a really good introduction.
But given your comment, I would advise you to master calculus, probability theory, linear algebra (the book has a small basis of the two last subjects), classical mechanics and classical electromagnetism first. Many concepts in quantum mechanics are being built up out from classical mechanics, after which they utterly deviate from the classical viewpoint. But in my opinion, one can only master quantum mechanics when he thoroughly understands the classical theory + a lot of math.
I would like to point out a conceptual correction here. You should always use ∣ A ∣ 2 instead of A 2 . This is because there is no unique A for such problems. You can always multiply any such A by e i θ and use that A .
Log in to reply
It's assumed our A is positive, I believe.
Log in to reply
Snehal is right. ∣ A ∣ 2 = A ∗ A , where A ∗ is the complex conjugate.
Nope. A is any complex number in general.
Why did Lai change the limits of of integration from 0 to Inf ?
Log in to reply
He was able to do this because ∣ x ∣ carries the same value x > 0 and x < 0 . So instead of splitting the integral into two parts, and multiplying by − 1 for x < 0 , he evaluated the integral over R + and doubled the value obtained because the real part of the planewave is an even function.
So in the picture I skipped a few steps for brevity, here are the steps I skipped:
The wave function times its own complex conjugate, since it’s exponential, the iπt cancels out. This happens a lot with exponential. This leaves us with -2π|x|, but since we squared it, it becomes the -4π|x| in the first equation.
Knowing that an absolute value function is really just piecewise, I add two intervals from negative infinity to zero and zero to positive infinity. Since on negative numbers, |x| = -x, I sub that in and cancel negatives.
For x >= 0, |x| = x. This gives me line 2.
Simple integration takes over equation 3, and the rest is self explanatory.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
A wavefunction must always satisfy
∫ − ∞ ∞ ∣ Ψ ( x , t ) ∣ 2 d x = 1
(In other words, the probability of finding a particle somewhere in space must be 100%.)
Since ∣ Ψ ( x , t ) ∣ 2 = ∣ A e − 2 π ∣ x ∣ e i π t ∣ 2 = A 2 e − 4 π ∣ x ∣ and (because ∫ a x d x = ln a a x )
∫ A 2 e − 4 π x d x = A 2 − 4 π e − 4 π x
(note the absence of the absolute value), hence
∫ − ∞ ∞ A 2 e − 4 π ∣ x ∣ d x = 2 ∫ 0 ∞ A 2 e − 4 π x d x = A 2 2 π 1 = 1
From this, we can then know that
A = 2 π ≈ 2 . 5 0 7