Vanishing Wavefunction: Show Expectation Values of x and p Vanish

  • Thread starter Thread starter misterpickle
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wavefunction
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating that the expectation values of position (x) and momentum (p) vanish for a specific wavefunction, φ(x). Participants clarify that the expectation values are computed using integrals involving the wavefunction ψ(x) and its shifted version. A key point raised is the confusion surrounding the presence of the expectation value, ⟨x⟩, within the integral, which is addressed by noting that ⟨x⟩ is a constant derived from another integral. The conversation emphasizes the need for algebraic manipulation rather than explicit integration to simplify the expressions. Ultimately, the challenge lies in correctly applying properties of wavefunctions and understanding their behavior under transformations.
misterpickle
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If <x> and <p> are the expectation values of x and p formed with the wave-function of a one-dimensional system, show that the expectation value of x and p formed with the wave-function vanishes. The wavefunction is:

\phi(x)=exp(-\frac{i}{h}\langle p\rangle x)\psi(x+\langle x\rangle)Basically I don't know how to start this problem. Do I plug in the integral forms of the expectation values into the exponential and distribute the psi over x and \langle x\rangle?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You left out some important text, but I found the problem set with a google search. \langle x\rangle, \langle p\rangle are computed with the wavefunction \psi(x), i.e.

\langle x\rangle = \int x \psi^*(x) \psi(x) \, dx, \ldots

You are asked to compute expectation values with the wavefunction \phi(x):

\langle x\rangle_\phi = \int x \phi^*(x) \phi(x) \, dx, \ldots

These expressions can be reduced to expectation values for certain quantities in the wavefunction \psi(x). You don't have to do any integrals explicity, just some algebra and derivatives.
 
I've set it up the way you suggested, and the exponential terms computing \langle x \rangle cancel. However there is a \langle x \rangle term in \psi(x+\langle x \rangle). Is this not a discrepancy to have the value you are trying to calculate inside the equation for calculating its value?

Specifically,

\int{ x \psi^{*}(x+\langle x \rangle) \psi(x+\langle x \rangle)\,dx}
 
misterpickle said:
I've set it up the way you suggested, and the exponential terms computing \langle x \rangle cancel. However there is a \langle x \rangle term in \psi(x+\langle x \rangle). Is this not a discrepancy to have the value you are trying to calculate inside the equation for calculating its value?

Specifically,

\int{ x \psi^{*}(x+\langle x \rangle) \psi(x+\langle x \rangle)\,dx}

Well \langle x \rangle is just a number (it came out of another integral over x, so it doesn't depend on x). There's still something you have to do to this integral though.
 
If \psi(x+\langle x \rangle) is distributable (meaning f(x+y)=f(x)+f(y)) then I come up with the following:

\int{ x \psi^{*}(x+\langle x \rangle) \psi(x+\langle x \rangle)\,dx}
\int{ x[ (\psi^{*}x+\psi^{*}\langle x \rangle)( \psi x+\psi\langle x \rangle)\,dx}
\int{ (\psi^{*}\psi x^{3}+2\psi^{*}\psi x^{2}\langle x \rangle+\psi^{*}\psi x\langle x \rangle^{2})\,dx}
\langle x^{3}\rangle +2\langle x^{2}\langle x \rangle\rangle + \langle x\langle x\rangle^{2}\rangle

...which doesn't make any sense to me. Also the "distributable" assumption I made does not work for exponentials, since f(x+y)=f(x)f(y) for exponential functions.
 
Yeah wavefunctions will almost never have that property since they're always related to exponential functions. Think about how you can convert this to an expectation value in \psi(x) by making a substitution in the integration variable.
 
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