Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Expectation value of Momentum

  • 19-06-2013 4:00pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 434 ✭✭


    I have a question which asks to determine the value of the expectation value of the momentum <p>. Where A=√3

    I have attached my solution, and under it is the given solution.

    You'll notice they are different; have I gone wrong somewhere?

    Thanks


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    Smythe wrote: »
    I have a question which asks to determine the value of the expectation value of the momentum <p>. Where A=√3

    I have attached my solution, and under it is the given solution.

    You'll notice they are different; have I gone wrong somewhere?

    Thanks

    Do they give the wave function?

    Your integration is correct.

    http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=integrate+x%5E2+from+0+to+1&lk=4&num=1


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 434 ✭✭Smythe


    Morbert wrote: »
    Do they give the wave function?

    Sorry, yes I should have included that. It states:

    A particle limited to the x axis has a wavefunction ψ=Ax between x=0 and x=1 and zero elsewhere.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The answer you got is definitely correct. It looks like they worked out that the integral of x rather than x^2 by mistake.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 311 ✭✭Lbeard


    Morbert wrote: »
    Do they give the wave function?

    Your integration is correct.

    http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=integrate+x%5E2+from+0+to+1&lk=4&num=1

    Damn....I didn't know Wolfram could do that.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    Smythe wrote: »
    Sorry, yes I should have included that. It states:

    A particle limited to the x axis has a wavefunction ψ=Ax between x=0 and x=1 and zero elsewhere.


    Hmm, so the wave function is not an eigenfunction of momentum. Very strange.

    [latex]\int \psi^* \hat{p} \psi dx[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -i\hbar \int \psi^* \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial x}dx[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -i\hbar \int Ax A\frac{\partial x}{\partial x}dx[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -i\hbar A^2 \int x dx[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -3i\hbar \left[\frac{x^2}{2}\right]^1_0[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -3i\hbar/2[/latex]


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Ah I see what went wrong. The provided solution's description of how to get the answer is wrong, rather than the answer itself.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 434 ✭✭Smythe


    Morbert wrote: »
    Hmm, so the wave function is not an eigenfunction of momentum. Very strange.

    [latex]\int \psi^* \hat{p} \psi dx[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -i\hbar \int \psi^* \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial x}dx[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -i\hbar \int Ax A\frac{\partial x}{\partial x}dx[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -i\hbar A^2 \int x dx[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -3i\hbar \left[\frac{x^2}{2}\right]^1_0[/latex]
    [latex]\Rightarrow -3i\hbar/2[/latex]

    That's great. Thanks very much for that.

    So it appears that the original provided solution is still incorrect with respect to the fact that it is not negative, or alternatively it should have the 'i' in the denominator if left as a positive value.

    Would that be correct?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    Smythe wrote: »
    That's great. Thanks very much for that.

    So it appears that the original provided solution is still incorrect with respect to the fact that it is not negative, or alternatively it should have the 'i' in the denominator if left as a positive value.

    Would that be correct?

    I believe so.


Advertisement