I I want to expand a Gaussian wavepacket in terms of sines

saadhusayn
Messages
17
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
I have a Gaussian wavepacket $$ \phi(x) = \frac{1}{(2\pi\sigma^2)^{\frac{1}{4}}}\exp \Big(-\frac{(x-x_{0})^{2}}{4\sigma^{2}} + ik_{0}(x-x_{0})\Big) $$

I want to find the Fourier sine coefficients when expanding this in terms of $$\psi_{n}(x) = \sqrt{2} \sin(n \pi x)$$.
From this paper, I am trying to compute the coefficients in the expansion of the Gaussian wavepacket

$$\phi(x) = \frac{1}{(2\pi\sigma^2)^{\frac{1}{4}}}\exp \Big(-\frac{(x-x_{0})^{2}}{4\sigma^{2}} + ik_{0}(x-x_{0})\Big) $$ where $$\sigma << 1$$and $$k_{0} >> \frac{1}{\sigma}$$
in terms of the functions $$ \psi_{n}(x) = \sqrt{2}\sin(n\pi x).$$

My attempt is as follows:

$$\phi(x) = \sum_{m}\alpha_{m}\psi_{m}(x) $$

From the orthogonality of sines, we have $$ \int_{-1}^{1}\psi_{m}(x) \psi_{n}(x) dx = 2 \delta_{mn}.$$ This gives us
$$ \alpha_{n} = \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}\frac{1}{(2\pi\sigma^2)^{\frac{1}{4}}} \int_{-1}^{1} dx \sin(n \pi x) \exp \Big(-\frac{(x-x_{0})^{2}}{4\sigma^{2}} + ik_{0}(x-x_{0})\Big).$$

My next step is to write the sine in terms of exponential functions and to complete the square on both terms to get:

$$ \alpha_{n} = \frac{1}{2i}\frac{1}{(8\pi \sigma^{2})^{\frac{1}{4}}}\int_{-1}^{+1}dx\Bigg(\exp\Big[-\frac{1}{4\sigma^{2}}(x-a_{+})^{2} -\sigma^2(k_{0}+\pi n)^2 +2in \pi x_{0}\Big] - \exp\Big[-\frac{1}{4\sigma^{2}}(x-a_{-})^{2} -\sigma^2(k_{0}-\pi n)^2 -2in \pi x_{0}\Big]\Bigg)$$


Here, $$a_{\pm} = 2\sigma^{2}\Big(\pm i n \pi + \frac{x_{0}}{2 \sigma^{2}} +ik_{0}\Big)$$

The next step is to use the fact that $$\sigma << 1$$ to extend the limits to $$\pm \infty$$ and treat the integral as approximately Gaussian. I get the following approximate result:

$$\alpha_{n} \approx -i(2 \pi \sigma^{2})^{\frac{1}{4}}\Bigg(\exp\Big[-\sigma^2(k_{0}+\pi n)^2 +2in \pi x_{0}\Big] - \exp\Big[-\sigma^2(k_{0}-\pi n)^2 -2in \pi x_{0}\Big]\Bigg)$$

But the correct answer according to the paper is (page 15, equation 5.9)

$$\alpha_{n} \approx i(2 \pi \sigma^{2})^{\frac{1}{4}} \exp\Big[-(k_{0}-\pi n)^{2} \sigma^{2} + i (k_{0} - \pi n) x_{0}\Big]$$

Would this problem be better solved using the stationary phase method or using the error function? Or do I have the right idea here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It looks like the paper sets up the problem so that the eigenfunctions are orthogonal on the domain 0 to 1, so start there. I'd also try to do a change variable in the integral in such a way to see that the upper limit will go to infinity while the lower limit stays zero.
 
Yes, you're right about the upper limit being ##1##. Also, the fact that ##\sigma << 1## implies that we might as well take the upper limit to ##+\infty##. But other than a factor in front, I don't see how that changes my answer.
 
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Back
Top