How does the potential for Quantum Mechanics differ between two scenarios?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the differences in quantum mechanics scenarios defined by two potential functions in relation to Schrödinger's equation. The first potential, which is infinite outside a specific range, leads to quantized energy states within the defined interval, while the second potential allows for wave functions extending beyond the origin. Participants explore how infinite potential creates boundary conditions that affect wave functions and energy levels. There is also a mention of the challenges in representing these potentials using TeX graphics. Understanding the implications of infinite potential is crucial for solving the differential equations associated with these scenarios.
ynuo
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
How does this potential:

V(x)={Inf for x<0, bx for 0<x<a, Inf for x>a}

differ from:

V(x)={Inf for x<0, bx for x>0}

with regards to Schrodinger's equation, wave functions, and the energy states.

P.S. the tex graphics are not showing when I try to post my question using tex macros. This is why I resorted to plain ascii.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you know how to treat an infinite potential within the context of 1-dim SE ?
 
This is the part that I have trouble with. I know that if I had a constant
potential or any other type of potential, then a substitution in Schrodinger's
equation will be required. From there I will have to solve a DE. But in
the case of infinite potential I am not sure.
 
Saying 'infinite potential' specifies a boundary condition for the DE. Guess which one?
 
I think I got it. Thanks.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top