Understanding Fourrier Transforms in Quantum Mechanics: Help Needed!

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on applying Fourier transforms to the hydrogen ground state in quantum mechanics. Participants clarify the integral expression needed to transform the wave function from position space to momentum space, emphasizing the importance of the correct sign in the exponent. They note that the constant factor in front of the integral can vary based on convention but should ensure normalization of the wave functions. A specific reference to a textbook is provided for further reading, and participants encourage sharing attempts for additional assistance. The conversation highlights the nuances of Fourier transforms in quantum mechanics and the importance of conventions in their application.
Fys
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I am studying Quantummechanics, but I don't see how Fourriertransforms in quantum mechanics work

I want to know how I can Fourrier Transform the Hydr. ground state, so the transform of
\phi\left(r\right)=\left(\frac{1}{\pi a_{0}^3}\right)^\frac{1}{2} e^\left-(\frac{r}{a_{0}}\right)

Does someone knows the answer

thanks,

Ben
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A Fouriertransform is used to convert one function in a certain space into the same function in one other space.

To represent the hydrogen ground state in p-space (momentum space) you evaluate the following integral over the whole space:

psi(p) = (2 pi h)^{-3/2} \int {exp(ip.r/h)*phi(r) dr}.

Where the expression for the hydrogen ground state is to be inserted at phi, h represent the reduced placks constant and the expression p.r is a scalar product between the two vectors p and r.

Hope you find yourself wiser after reading this!

/The Latex-rookie
 
He Reid thanks

but should it not be (2 pi h)^{-1/2}?
Do you know where on the net I can find this formula

Thanks for the help
 
It doesn't really matter which factor you put in front of the transform, as long as you make sure that the factor of the inverse transform is such that transforming forth and back subsequently yields the same answer. It's a matter of convention and convention differs in different areas of physics. In this case, Reid suggested ( (2 pi h)^{-1/2} )^3 because you are working in three dimensions. Other common factors include (2pi)^{-1/2}, (2 pi i)^{-1/2}.
 
Hi again,
sorry I don't know where to find it on the net. It is the eq. (2.59) in the book Quantum mechanics, second edition by Bransden & Joachain.

As CompuChip writes, the coefficient in front of the integral is just for later convinience.

I must however confess to a mistake: the exponent should be negative, i.e.
psi(p) = (2 pi h)^{-3/2} \int {exp(-ip.r/h)*phi(r) dr}. I hope I haven't mislead you too bad.

It is the in the exponent of the Fouriertransform from the p-space to r-space where the exponent should be positive, i.e.
phi(r) = (2 pi h)^{-3/2} \int {exp(ip.r/h)*psi(r) dr}.

Have a nice day! :)
 
The constant infront you can always put in there afterwards, since you demand the wavefunctions to be normalised. The constant depends on what dimensions you have. For 1-dim sqrt(2pi*hbar) is mostley used for example.

The momentum-wave function is the Fourier transform of the position-wave function, so the exponential should have minus sign.

And vice versa, the position-wave function is the inverse Fourier transform of the momentum-wave function, so no minus sign in the exponential.

So what I told you here is just a confirmation on what CompuChip and Reid told you =) Go a head and try, if you don't get the correct answer, post your attempt here and we'll try to help you.
 
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