Schrödinger equation for particle on a ring in a magnetic field

Gavroy
Messages
232
Reaction score
0
hi

i need the schrödinger equation for a particle(electron) in a ring under the influence of a magnetic field that goes through perpendicular to the plane of the ring and i want to consider the spin too.

Well, the particle in the ring is pretty easy:

- \frac{ \hbar^2}{2mr^2} \psi''(\phi)=E \psi (\phi)

but what is about the magnetic field?

i thought that if i take

E_{pot}=\mu B=\frac{e m v r}{2m}B=\frac{e l B}{2m}

and therefore:
- \frac{ \hbar^2}{2mr^2} \psi''(\phi)+\frac{i \hbar e}{2m} \psi '(\phi) B=E \psi (\phi)

and then i would get an additional term if i want to consider the spin:


E_{pot}=\mu B=\frac{-g_s \mu_B \sigma }{\hbar }B
and therefore:
- \frac{ \hbar^2}{2mr^2} \psi''(\phi)+\frac{i \hbar e}{2m} \psi '(\phi) B+\frac{-g_s \mu_B \sigma }{\hbar }B\psi(\phi)=E \psi (\phi)

so, is this the right equation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's not completely correct.

The important point of electromagnetic fields is that it is a gauge field, and thus to get a gauge invariant equation, you have to introduce the covariant derivative

D_{\mu}=\partial_{\mu}+\mathrm{i} q A_{\mu},

where A_{\mu} is the four potential of the electromagnetic field. In the following non-relativistic limit I write A_0=\Phi for the scalar potential and \vec{A} for the vector potential.

For non-relativistic without spin you start with the Schroedinger equation for a free particle

\mathrm{i} \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}=-\frac{1}{2m} \Delta \psi.

To couple the electromagnetic field to it, you just substitute all derivatives by their gauge-covariant derivatives, i.e.,

\partial_t \rightarrow D_0=\partial_t+\mathrm{i} q \Phi.

For the gradient one has

D_i = \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} + \mathrm{i} q A_i = \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} - \mathrm{i} q A^i,

i.e. the correct substitution for the nabla operator in 3D-vector analysis notation reads

\vec{\nabla} \rightarrow \vec{D}=\vec{\nabla}-\mathrm{i} q A^i.

Plugging this into the Schrödinger equation, one gets

\mathrm{i} \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}-q \Phi \psi=\frac{1}{2m} (-\mathrm{i} \vec{\nabla}-q \vec{A})^2 \psi

or to extract the Hamiltonian

\mathrm{i} \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}=\hat{H} \psi=\frac{1}{2m} [-\Delta \psi - \mathrm{i} \vec{\nabla} \cdot (\vec{A} \psi) - \mathrm{i} \vec{A} \cdot \vec{\nabla} \psi - q^2 \vec{A}^2 \psi]+ q \Phi \psi.

For a homogeneous magnetic field you set

\vec{A}=-\frac{1}{2} \vec{x} \times \vec{B}.

To consider spin you indeed only need to add

\hat{H}_{\text{Spin}}=-\frac{q}{2m} g_S \hat{\vec{S}} \cdot \vec{B}.

This leads to the Pauli equation.

For the problem of a particle restricted to a circle, just substitute the gradient and Laplacean in spherical coordinates and set \partial/\partial r=\partial/\partial \vartheta=0.
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
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...
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