Picking the different solutions to the time independent Schrodinger eqaution Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Solving the time independent Schrodinger equation: Does a complex solution make sense?How does a complex wavefunction “hold” energy?Change of variable in harmonic oscillator time independent Schrodinger equationQuantum mechanics in electric fieldConstructing solutions to the time-dependent Schrödinger's equationProtocol for solving time independent Schrodinger equationScaling the Time Independent Schrodinger EquationMomentum in time independent schrodinger equationOn Griffith Quantum example 2.1: normalization of wave function in time.1D Time independent Schrodinger eq. with limit

Working around an AWS network ACL rule limit

Fishing simulator

Unable to start mainnet node docker container

What to do with post with dry rot?

Mortgage adviser recommends a longer term than necessary combined with overpayments

Keep going mode for require-package

Are my PIs rude or am I just being too sensitive?

Active filter with series inductor and resistor - do these exist?

Should you tell Jews they are breaking a commandment?

Slither Like a Snake

What LEGO pieces have "real-world" functionality?

How should I respond to a player wanting to catch a sword between their hands?

Why does this iterative way of solving of equation work?

How to say that you spent the night with someone, you were only sleeping and nothing else?

If I can make up priors, why can't I make up posteriors?

Is there a documented rationale why the House Ways and Means chairman can demand tax info?

What kind of display is this?

Does a C shift expression have unsigned type? Why would Splint warn about a right-shift?

When communicating altitude with a '9' in it, should it be pronounced "nine hundred" or "niner hundred"?

Antler Helmet: Can it work?

How do I automatically answer y in bash script?

Can a monk deflect thrown melee weapons?

Can smartphones with the same camera sensor have different image quality?

What did Darwin mean by 'squib' here?



Picking the different solutions to the time independent Schrodinger eqaution



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Solving the time independent Schrodinger equation: Does a complex solution make sense?How does a complex wavefunction “hold” energy?Change of variable in harmonic oscillator time independent Schrodinger equationQuantum mechanics in electric fieldConstructing solutions to the time-dependent Schrödinger's equationProtocol for solving time independent Schrodinger equationScaling the Time Independent Schrodinger EquationMomentum in time independent schrodinger equationOn Griffith Quantum example 2.1: normalization of wave function in time.1D Time independent Schrodinger eq. with limit










2












$begingroup$


The time independent Schrodinger equation
$$-frachbar^22m fracd^2psidx^2+Vpsi = Epsi$$ can have many different solutions of $psi$ for a particular value of $E$.



For example, if we found a complex solution $psi(x)$ for a particular value of $E$, say $E_0$, we can write $psi(x)=a(x)+ib(x)$. Then $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ will also be solutions to the T.I.S.E with $E=E_0$. Furthermore $c_1a(x)+c_2b(x)$ will also be solutions with $c_1$ and $c_2$ being arbitrary constants.



I read that one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$. But does that mean all these different solutions represent the same physical state of a particle?



The expectation value of any dynamical variable $Q(x,p)$ is given by
$int psi^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)psi. $ How do we know for sure that $int a(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)a(x) $ and $int b(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)b(x)$ gives the same expectation values?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
    $endgroup$
    – Gert
    Mar 23 at 0:18















2












$begingroup$


The time independent Schrodinger equation
$$-frachbar^22m fracd^2psidx^2+Vpsi = Epsi$$ can have many different solutions of $psi$ for a particular value of $E$.



For example, if we found a complex solution $psi(x)$ for a particular value of $E$, say $E_0$, we can write $psi(x)=a(x)+ib(x)$. Then $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ will also be solutions to the T.I.S.E with $E=E_0$. Furthermore $c_1a(x)+c_2b(x)$ will also be solutions with $c_1$ and $c_2$ being arbitrary constants.



I read that one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$. But does that mean all these different solutions represent the same physical state of a particle?



The expectation value of any dynamical variable $Q(x,p)$ is given by
$int psi^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)psi. $ How do we know for sure that $int a(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)a(x) $ and $int b(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)b(x)$ gives the same expectation values?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
    $endgroup$
    – Gert
    Mar 23 at 0:18













2












2








2


0



$begingroup$


The time independent Schrodinger equation
$$-frachbar^22m fracd^2psidx^2+Vpsi = Epsi$$ can have many different solutions of $psi$ for a particular value of $E$.



For example, if we found a complex solution $psi(x)$ for a particular value of $E$, say $E_0$, we can write $psi(x)=a(x)+ib(x)$. Then $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ will also be solutions to the T.I.S.E with $E=E_0$. Furthermore $c_1a(x)+c_2b(x)$ will also be solutions with $c_1$ and $c_2$ being arbitrary constants.



I read that one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$. But does that mean all these different solutions represent the same physical state of a particle?



The expectation value of any dynamical variable $Q(x,p)$ is given by
$int psi^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)psi. $ How do we know for sure that $int a(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)a(x) $ and $int b(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)b(x)$ gives the same expectation values?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




The time independent Schrodinger equation
$$-frachbar^22m fracd^2psidx^2+Vpsi = Epsi$$ can have many different solutions of $psi$ for a particular value of $E$.



For example, if we found a complex solution $psi(x)$ for a particular value of $E$, say $E_0$, we can write $psi(x)=a(x)+ib(x)$. Then $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ will also be solutions to the T.I.S.E with $E=E_0$. Furthermore $c_1a(x)+c_2b(x)$ will also be solutions with $c_1$ and $c_2$ being arbitrary constants.



I read that one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$. But does that mean all these different solutions represent the same physical state of a particle?



The expectation value of any dynamical variable $Q(x,p)$ is given by
$int psi^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)psi. $ How do we know for sure that $int a(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)a(x) $ and $int b(x)^*Q(x,frachbarifracddx)b(x)$ gives the same expectation values?







quantum-mechanics wavefunction schroedinger-equation






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 23 at 2:56









Qmechanic

108k122001245




108k122001245










asked Mar 22 at 22:55









TaeNyFanTaeNyFan

55314




55314











  • $begingroup$
    The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
    $endgroup$
    – Gert
    Mar 23 at 0:18
















  • $begingroup$
    The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
    $endgroup$
    – Gert
    Mar 23 at 0:18















$begingroup$
The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
$endgroup$
– Gert
Mar 23 at 0:18




$begingroup$
The last two integrals don't seem to have an infinitesimal?
$endgroup$
– Gert
Mar 23 at 0:18










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















6












$begingroup$

  1. In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.



  2. If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.



    There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.



    Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.







share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$




















    4












    $begingroup$

    Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.



    For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$




















      4












      $begingroup$


      ... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.




      That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.



      A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.



      (I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$




















        1












        $begingroup$

        For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.



        Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).



        The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.



        The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
        solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
        $$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
        It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
        If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
        $$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
        $$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
        $$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
        $$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
        q.e.d.



        The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
        counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$













          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "151"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f468127%2fpicking-the-different-solutions-to-the-time-independent-schrodinger-eqaution%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes








          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          6












          $begingroup$

          1. In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.



          2. If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.



            There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.



            Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.







          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$

















            6












            $begingroup$

            1. In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.



            2. If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.



              There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.



              Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.







            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$















              6












              6








              6





              $begingroup$

              1. In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.



              2. If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.



                There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.



                Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.







              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



              1. In ordinary quantum mechanics, two wavefunctions represent the same physical state if and only if they are multiples of each other, that is $psi$ and $cpsi$ represent the same state for any $cinmathbbC$. If you insist on wavefunctions being normalized, then $c$ is restricted to complex numbers of absolute value 1, i.e. number of the form $mathrme^mathrmik$ for some $kin[0,2pi)$.



              2. If $psi(x) = a(x) + mathrmib(x)$ is a solution of the Schrödinger equation, then it is not automatically true that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ are also solutions. It is "accidentally" true for the time-independent Schrödinger equation because applying complex conjugation shows us directly that $psi^ast(x)$ is a solution if $psi(x)$ is, and $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ can be obtained by linear combinations of $psi(x)$ and $psi^ast(x)$.



                There are now two cases: If $psi$ and $psi^ast$ are not linearly independent - i.e. one can be obtained from the other by multiplication with a complex constant - then the space of solutions for this energy is still one-dimensional, and there's only a single physical state. If they are linearly independent, then there are at least two distinct physical states with this energy.



                Note that already the free particle with $V=0$ gives a counter-example to the claim that all solutions for the same energy have the same values for all expectation values. There we have plane wave solutions $psi(x) = mathrme^mathrmipx$ and $psi^ast(x) = mathrme^-mathrmipx$ that are linearly-independent complex conjugates with the same energy that differ in the sign of their expectation value for the momentum operator $p$.








              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Mar 22 at 23:29









              ACuriousMindACuriousMind

              73.3k18130325




              73.3k18130325





















                  4












                  $begingroup$

                  Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.



                  For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$

















                    4












                    $begingroup$

                    Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.



                    For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$















                      4












                      4








                      4





                      $begingroup$

                      Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.



                      For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      Solutions can be degenerate with the same expectation value of the energy, but they can have different expectation values for other operators like angular momentum or it $z$ component.



                      For example the hydrogenic wave functions with $n=2$: $2s$ and $2p$. And then there are three different $2p$ wave functions that can be written as linear combinations of $2p_x, 2p_y, 2p_z$ or of the spherical harmonics $Y_ell,m$ with $ell=1$ and $m=-1,0,1$.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Mar 22 at 23:11









                      PieterPieter

                      9,35931536




                      9,35931536





















                          4












                          $begingroup$


                          ... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.




                          That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.



                          A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.



                          (I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$

















                            4












                            $begingroup$


                            ... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.




                            That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.



                            A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.



                            (I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)






                            share|cite|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$















                              4












                              4








                              4





                              $begingroup$


                              ... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.




                              That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.



                              A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.



                              (I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)






                              share|cite|improve this answer









                              $endgroup$




                              ... one can always choose any of these solutions as the solution for the stationary state with energy $E_0$.




                              That statement is misleading because of how it uses the word "the," suggesting uniqueness. If both occurrances of "the" were replaced by "a," then the statement would make sense.



                              A given observable will typically have different expectation values in two different states with the same energy. For example, when $V=0$, the functions $exp(pm ipx/hbar)$ both have energy $E=p^2/2m$, but they have different eigenvalues ($pm p$) of the momentum operator $P=-ihbarpartial/partial x$.



                              (I'm being relaxed here about using words like "eigenstate" for non-normalizable functions, but I think those mathematical technicalities are beside the point of this question.)







                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer










                              answered Mar 22 at 23:12









                              Chiral AnomalyChiral Anomaly

                              13.9k21946




                              13.9k21946





















                                  1












                                  $begingroup$

                                  For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.



                                  Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).



                                  The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.



                                  The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
                                  solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
                                  $$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
                                  It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
                                  If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
                                  $$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
                                  $$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
                                  $$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
                                  $$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
                                  q.e.d.



                                  The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
                                  counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer









                                  $endgroup$

















                                    1












                                    $begingroup$

                                    For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.



                                    Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).



                                    The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.



                                    The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
                                    solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
                                    $$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
                                    It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
                                    If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
                                    $$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
                                    $$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
                                    $$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
                                    $$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
                                    q.e.d.



                                    The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
                                    counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.






                                    share|cite|improve this answer









                                    $endgroup$















                                      1












                                      1








                                      1





                                      $begingroup$

                                      For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.



                                      Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).



                                      The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.



                                      The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
                                      solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
                                      $$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
                                      It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
                                      If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
                                      $$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
                                      $$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
                                      $$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
                                      $$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
                                      q.e.d.



                                      The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
                                      counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.






                                      share|cite|improve this answer









                                      $endgroup$



                                      For a onedimensional equation like the one you propose something more certain may be said.



                                      Schrödinger equation is a second-order, linear and homogeneous ODE. Then a unique solution is determined giving $psi(x_0)$ and $psi'(x_0)$. As a consequence, there can't be more than two independent solutions (for a given $E$).



                                      The homogeneous boundary value problem ($psi(a)=psi(b)=0$ for given $a$, $b$, even infinite) is still more restricted: for each eigenvalue there is only one independent solution. In other words, eigenvalues are never degenerate.



                                      The proof makes use of the Wronskian. Let $psi_1$, $psi_2$ two
                                      solutions (for the same $E$ and the same boundary conditions). Define
                                      $$W(x) = psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x).$$
                                      It can be shown that $W(x)$ is a constant, the same for all $x$.
                                      If the boundary conditions are homogeneous, clearly $W(x)=0$ for all $x$:
                                      $$psi_1(x),psi_2'(x) - psi_1'(x),psi_2(x) = 0$$
                                      $$psi_1'(x) over psi_1(x) = psi_2'(x) over psi_2(x)$$
                                      $$logpsi_1(x) = logpsi_2(x) + c$$
                                      $$psi_1(x) = psi_2(x),e^c$$
                                      q.e.d.



                                      The case of a free particle, with two solutions, is no
                                      counterexample, since in that case there are no homogeneous boundary conditions. Anyhow you get two independent solutions and no more.







                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                      answered Mar 24 at 20:41









                                      Elio FabriElio Fabri

                                      3,6881214




                                      3,6881214



























                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded
















































                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid


                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function ()
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f468127%2fpicking-the-different-solutions-to-the-time-independent-schrodinger-eqaution%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          Bruad Bilen | Luke uk diar | NawigatsjuunCommonskategorii: BruadCommonskategorii: RunstükenWikiquote: Bruad

                                          What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

                                          Slayer Innehåll Historia | Stil, komposition och lyrik | Bandets betydelse och framgångar | Sidoprojekt och samarbeten | Kontroverser | Medlemmar | Utmärkelser och nomineringar | Turnéer och festivaler | Diskografi | Referenser | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmenywww.slayer.net”Metal Massacre vol. 1””Metal Massacre vol. 3””Metal Massacre Volume III””Show No Mercy””Haunting the Chapel””Live Undead””Hell Awaits””Reign in Blood””Reign in Blood””Gold & Platinum – Reign in Blood””Golden Gods Awards Winners”originalet”Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Looks Back On 37-Year Career In New Video Series: Part Two””South of Heaven””Gold & Platinum – South of Heaven””Seasons in the Abyss””Gold & Platinum - Seasons in the Abyss””Divine Intervention””Divine Intervention - Release group by Slayer””Gold & Platinum - Divine Intervention””Live Intrusion””Undisputed Attitude””Abolish Government/Superficial Love””Release “Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer” by Various Artists””Diabolus in Musica””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””God Hates Us All””Systematic - Relationships””War at the Warfield””Gold & Platinum - War at the Warfield””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””Gold & Platinum - Still Reigning””Metallica, Slayer, Iron Mauden Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Eternal Pyre””Eternal Pyre - Slayer release group””Eternal Pyre””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Bullet-For My Valentine booed at Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Unholy Aliance””The End Of Slayer?””Slayer: We Could Thrash Out Two More Albums If We're Fast Enough...””'The Unholy Alliance: Chapter III' UK Dates Added”originalet”Megadeth And Slayer To Co-Headline 'Canadian Carnage' Trek”originalet”World Painted Blood””Release “World Painted Blood” by Slayer””Metallica Heading To Cinemas””Slayer, Megadeth To Join Forces For 'European Carnage' Tour - Dec. 18, 2010”originalet”Slayer's Hanneman Contracts Acute Infection; Band To Bring In Guest Guitarist””Cannibal Corpse's Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer's Guest Guitarist”originalet”Slayer’s Jeff Hanneman Dead at 49””Dave Lombardo Says He Made Only $67,000 In 2011 While Touring With Slayer””Slayer: We Do Not Agree With Dave Lombardo's Substance Or Timeline Of Events””Slayer Welcomes Drummer Paul Bostaph Back To The Fold””Slayer Hope to Unveil Never-Before-Heard Jeff Hanneman Material on Next Album””Slayer Debut New Song 'Implode' During Surprise Golden Gods Appearance””Release group Repentless by Slayer””Repentless - Slayer - Credits””Slayer””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer - to release comic book "Repentless #1"””Slayer To Release 'Repentless' 6.66" Vinyl Box Set””BREAKING NEWS: Slayer Announce Farewell Tour””Slayer Recruit Lamb of God, Anthrax, Behemoth + Testament for Final Tour””Slayer lägger ner efter 37 år””Slayer Announces Second North American Leg Of 'Final' Tour””Final World Tour””Slayer Announces Final European Tour With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Tour Europe With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Play 'Last French Show Ever' At Next Year's Hellfst””Slayer's Final World Tour Will Extend Into 2019””Death Angel's Rob Cavestany On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour: 'Some Of Us Could See This Coming'””Testament Has No Plans To Retire Anytime Soon, Says Chuck Billy””Anthrax's Scott Ian On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour Plans: 'I Was Surprised And I Wasn't Surprised'””Slayer””Slayer's Morbid Schlock””Review/Rock; For Slayer, the Mania Is the Message””Slayer - Biography””Slayer - Reign In Blood”originalet”Dave Lombardo””An exclusive oral history of Slayer”originalet”Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman”originalet”Thinking Out Loud: Slayer's Kerry King on hair metal, Satan and being polite””Slayer Lyrics””Slayer - Biography””Most influential artists for extreme metal music””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dies aged 49””Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer””Gateway to Hell: A Tribute to Slayer””Covered In Blood””Slayer: The Origins of Thrash in San Francisco, CA.””Why They Rule - #6 Slayer”originalet”Guitar World's 100 Greatest Heavy Metal Guitarists Of All Time”originalet”The fans have spoken: Slayer comes out on top in readers' polls”originalet”Tribute to Jeff Hanneman (1964-2013)””Lamb Of God Frontman: We Sound Like A Slayer Rip-Off””BEHEMOTH Frontman Pays Tribute To SLAYER's JEFF HANNEMAN””Slayer, Hatebreed Doing Double Duty On This Year's Ozzfest””System of a Down””Lacuna Coil’s Andrea Ferro Talks Influences, Skateboarding, Band Origins + More””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Into The Lungs of Hell””Slayer rules - en utställning om fans””Slayer and Their Fans Slashed Through a No-Holds-Barred Night at Gas Monkey””Home””Slayer””Gold & Platinum - The Big 4 Live from Sofia, Bulgaria””Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Kerry King””2008-02-23: Wiltern, Los Angeles, CA, USA””Slayer's Kerry King To Perform With Megadeth Tonight! - Oct. 21, 2010”originalet”Dave Lombardo - Biography”Slayer Case DismissedArkiveradUltimate Classic Rock: Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dead at 49.”Slayer: "We could never do any thing like Some Kind Of Monster..."””Cannibal Corpse'S Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer'S Guest Guitarist | The Official Slayer Site”originalet”Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Kerrang! Awards 2006 Blog: Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Kerrang! Awards 2013: Kerrang! Legend”originalet”Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maien Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Bullet For My Valentine Booed At Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer's Concert History””Slayer - Relationships””Slayer - Releases”Slayers officiella webbplatsSlayer på MusicBrainzOfficiell webbplatsSlayerSlayerr1373445760000 0001 1540 47353068615-5086262726cb13906545x(data)6033143kn20030215029