Is This Wavefunction a Valid Solution for the Schrödinger Equation?

AI Thread Summary
The wavefunction ψ(x,y,z) = Ae^{i\mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{r}} is shown to satisfy the Schrödinger equation, with the relationship between k and energy E established as E = (ħ²/2m)(k_x² + k_y² + k_z²). The discussion highlights the need to clarify the notation used for derivatives and the relationship between the wavevector k and the energy E. A suggestion is made to separate the time-dependent part of the wavefunction, indicating that the full wavefunction should be expressed as a product of the spatial function and a time-dependent function. This approach aims to simplify the analysis of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation.
beyondlight
Messages
64
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Show that this solution:

\psi(x,y,z)=Ae^{i\mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{r}}

is a solution for this equation:

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\Delta \psi(x,y,z)=E\,\psi(x,y,z),

How is K related to E?

How does the corresponding timedependent function look like?



The Attempt at a Solution



My second derivative is:

\psi''(x,y,z)=i^{2}k_x^{2}A \cdot e^{ik_x*r} \cdot e^{ik_y*r} \cdot e^{ik_z*r} = -k_x^{2}A \cdot e^{ik_x*r} \cdot e^{ik_y*r} \cdot e^{ik_z*r}=-k_x^{2} \cdot \psi

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}(k_x^{2} + k_y^{2} + k_z^{2}) \cdot \psi = E \cdot \psi

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}(k_x^{2} + k_y^{2} + k_z^{2}) = E


I suppose it is enough to say that

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m} (k_x^{2} + k_y^{2} + k_z^{2}) is energy? So it automatically satisfies the S.E.? What is the unit of \psi?

But the relation between k and E should then be:

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m} \cdot (k_x^{2} + k_y^{2} + k_z^{2}) = \frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m} \cdot K = E

\frac{E}{K}= \frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}


But the last task is a bit more tricky...I will just separate the time-depentent S.E.

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\Delta \psi = i\hbar \frac{d\psi}{dt}

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\Delta = i\hbar \frac{d\psi}{dt} \cdot \frac{1}{\psi}

Can someone help me from here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Welcome to Physics Forums.

beyondlight said:

Homework Statement



Show that this solution:

\psi(x,y,z)=Ae^{i\mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{r}}

is a solution for this equation:

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\Delta \psi(x,y,z)=E\,\psi(x,y,z),

How is K related to E?

How does the corresponding timedependent function look like?



The Attempt at a Solution



My second derivative is:

\psi''(x,y,z)=i^{2}k_x^{2}A \cdot e^{ik_x*r} \cdot e^{ik_y*r} \cdot e^{ik_z*r} = -k_x^{2}A \cdot e^{ik_x*r} \cdot e^{ik_y*r} \cdot e^{ik_z*r}=-k_x^{2} \cdot \psi
Small correction: it really should be kxx, kyy, etc. here. And it looks like you are using ψ'' to mean ∂²ψ/∂x². But you have the right idea.

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}(k_x^{2} + k_y^{2} + k_z^{2}) \cdot \psi = E \cdot \psi

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}(k_x^{2} + k_y^{2} + k_z^{2}) = E


I suppose it is enough to say that

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m} (k_x^{2} + k_y^{2} + k_z^{2}) is energy? So it automatically satisfies the S.E.? What is the unit of \psi?

But the relation between k and E should then be:

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m} \cdot (k_x^{2} + k_y^{2} + k_z^{2}) = \frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m} \cdot K = E

\frac{E}{K}= \frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}

Close, but not quite. You are saying that

k_x^2 + k_y^2 + k_z^2 = k^1 ?​

I think you need to modify the k1 term, slightly, to have a true statement here.

But the last task is a bit more tricky...I will just separate the time-depentent S.E.

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\Delta \psi = i\hbar \frac{d\psi}{dt}

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\Delta = i\hbar \frac{d\psi}{dt} \cdot \frac{1}{\psi}

Can someone help me from here?
Let's back up 1 step to

\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\Delta \psi = i\hbar \frac{d\psi}{dt}

Since ψ is a function of (x,y,z) only, we really need another symbol for the time-dependent part. It's common to assume the full wavefunction is the product of a spatial function (that's ψ(x,y,z) ) and a time-dependent function (call it f(t)). So you want to put ψ(x,y,z)·f(t) into the time-dependent Schrodinger Equation, and work out what f(t) is.

Hope that helps. By the way, \partial will give you the partial derivative symbol in LaTeX.
 
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