Quantum Mechanics - Infinite Potential Well

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion on the infinite potential well, a particle's wavefunction is defined between -a and a, with the task of finding the probability of the particle having a specific energy level. The energy levels are given by the equation E_n = n^2\bar{h}^2\pi^2/(8ma). To determine the probability, the wavefunction must be projected onto the appropriate cosine solution, and the resulting value squared. The sine solution is deemed invalid due to the well's even parity. A clarification is needed regarding the normalization constant A, which should not depend on x but rather be a constant determined by the initial condition of the wavefunction.
TheBaker
Messages
18
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A particle is trapped in an infinite potential well, with the infinite walls at ±a. At time t=0, the wavefunction of the particle is

\psi = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2a}}

between -a and a, and 0 otherwise.

Find the probability that the Energy of the particle is \frac{9 \bar{h}^2 \pi^2}{8ma^2}

Homework Equations



E_n = \frac{n^2\bar{h}^2\pi^2}{8ma}

\psi = A \cos{\frac{(2r+1) \pi x}{2a}} for |x| < a
\psi = 0 otherwise

The Attempt at a Solution



I've calculated the above equations, but I'm unsure how to get from them to the probability of the particle having a certain energy. This could be really simple and it's me just having a brain dead moment, but any help would be very much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
btw there is also a sin solution with an argument (in your notation) 2r(pi)x/a

personally I prefer the notation n(pi)x/a n even

however the cos solution you wrote is the one you want with r=1, that 2r+1 thing is just a way of writing n so that n is always odd.

so just take the projection of psi at t=0 on your cos function and square the answer
 
The sin solution isn't valid because this well has even parity (i.e. it's symmetric).

How do I find A? Presumably I need to use the initial condition of Psi, but I found when doing that that A is x dependent, when it should be a constant.
 
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