Limits of Integration in the Transmission Coefficient

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the limits of integration in the transmission coefficient equation from the textbook "Quantum Mechanics" by Nouredine Zettili. It highlights a potential error in equation (9.446), where the limits are set incorrectly, leading to a negative value for gamma (γ) instead of a positive one. The participants argue that the limits should remain consistent, with the lower limit being zero, regardless of the direction of tunneling. They emphasize that switching the limits would alter the transmission coefficient (T), which should remain the same for both left-to-right and right-to-left tunneling scenarios. The conclusion suggests a misprint in the limits of integration in equation (9.448) that needs correction.
Samama Fahim
Messages
52
Reaction score
4
Homework Statement
Why are the limits of integration swapped in the following equation without introducing a minus sign?
Relevant Equations
##\int_0^1\sqrt{\frac{1}{x}-1}dx##
zetilli limits of integ.JPG


Initially '0' is the upper limit and ##a = \frac{Ze^2}{E}## is the lower limit. With change of variable ##x = \frac{Er}{Ze^2}##, for ##r=0##, ##x=0##, and for ##r=\frac{Ze^2}{E}##, ##x=1##, so 1 should be the lower limit. However, he takes 1 as the upper limit, and without a minus sign. Why is that?

(from Quantum Mechanics, Nouredine Zettili)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It appears to me that the error is in equation (9.446) of the text. ##\gamma## should be positive. But the way the limits are set up in the integral of (9.446), ##\gamma## will come out negative (since ##dr## in the integral will be negative). So, I think the limits should be switched in this integral with the lower limit being zero. The text refers back to (9.247). Does (9.247) agree with (9.446)?
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2 and vela
TSny said:
It appears to me that the error is in equation (9.446) of the text. ##\gamma## should be positive. But the way the limits are set up in the integral of (9.446), ##\gamma## will come out negative (since ##dr## in the integral will be negative). So, I think the limits should be switched in this integral with the lower limit being zero. The text refers back to (9.247). Does (9.247) agree with (9.446)?
9.247 reads ##T \backsim e^{-2\gamma}##, ##\gamma = \frac{1}{\hbar}\int_{x_1}^{x_2}\sqrt{2m(V-E)} dx##
 
Samama Fahim said:
9.247 reads ##T \backsim e^{-2\gamma}##, ##\gamma = \frac{1}{\hbar}\int_{x_1}^{x_2}\sqrt{2m(V-E)} dx##
OK. This was probably discussed for the case where the particle tunnels from left to right through the barrier. That is, ##x_1## is the turning point on the left side and ##x_2## is the turning point on the right side. So, ##x_2 > x_1##.

The same formula (with no change in the integration limits for ##\gamma##) is valid in the WKB approximation if the particle tunnels from right to left through the barrier. The textbook appears to have made the mistake of assuming that the limits of integration should be switched in this case. You shouldn't switch the limits.

For example, suppose the potential barrier is symmetrically shaped, as shown.
1652727712064.png

Clearly, the transmission coefficient ##T## for right-to-left tunneling is the same as for left-to-right tunneling. In both cases, the turning point on the left (##x_1##) should be the lower limit of integration in the expression for ##\gamma##. Switching the limits would change ##T##.
 
  • Like
Likes Samama Fahim
I think there was a misprint in the limits of integration of equ. 9.448. You have
$$
\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_1^{0}\sqrt{\frac{1}{x}-1}dx
$$
Make the substitution ##t=\frac{1}{x}-1## with ##dx=-\frac{dt}{(u+1)^2}## the integral becomes
$$
I=-\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_{\infty}^0 \frac{t^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(t+1)^2}dt
$$
$$
=\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(t+1)^2}dt
$$
Using the formula for the Beta function
$$
B(x,y)=\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{x-1}}{(t+1)^{x+y}}dt
$$
and the Beta function in terms of Gamma functions,
$$
B(x,y)=\frac{\Gamma (x) \Gamma (y)}{\Gamma (x +y)}
$$
We find
$$
I=\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}B(\frac{3}{2},\frac{1}{2})=\frac{\pi Ze^2\sqrt{m}}{\hbar \sqrt{2E}}
$$
which is the obtained result in equ. 9.448.
 
Fred Wright said:
I think there was a misprint in the limits of integration of equ. 9.448. You have
$$
\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_1^{0}\sqrt{\frac{1}{x}-1}dx
$$
Make the substitution ##t=\frac{1}{x}-1## with ##dx=-\frac{dt}{(u+1)^2}## the integral becomes
$$
I=-\frac{Ze^2\sqrt{2m}}{\hbar \sqrt{E}}\int_{\infty}^0 \frac{t^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(t+1)^2}dt
$$

Wouldn't the limits of integration be switched in the last line above? The substitution ##t=\frac{1}{x}-1## gives ##t = 0## when ##x= 1##, and ##t = \infty## when ##x = 0##.

So, with the substitution ##t=\frac{1}{x}-1##, $$ \int_1^0\sqrt{\frac{1}{x}-1}dx = -\int_0^\infty \frac{t^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(t+1)^2}dt$$
 
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