Mercurial > dylan
diff org/bk4.org @ 0:f743fd0f4d8b
initial commit of dylan's stuff
author | Robert McIntyre <rlm@mit.edu> |
---|---|
date | Mon, 17 Oct 2011 23:17:55 -0700 |
parents | |
children |
line wrap: on
line diff
1.1 --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 1.2 +++ b/org/bk4.org Mon Oct 17 23:17:55 2011 -0700 1.3 @@ -0,0 +1,309 @@ 1.4 +#+TITLE: Bugs in quantum mechanics 1.5 +#+AUTHOR: Dylan Holmes 1.6 +#+SETUPFILE: ../../aurellem/org/setup.org 1.7 +#+INCLUDE: ../../aurellem/org/level-0.org 1.8 + 1.9 +#Bugs in Quantum Mechanics 1.10 +#Bugs in the Quantum-Mechanical Momentum Operator 1.11 + 1.12 + 1.13 +I studied quantum mechanics the same way I study most subjects\mdash{} 1.14 +by collecting (and squashing) bugs in my understanding. One of these 1.15 +bugs persisted throughout two semesters of 1.16 +quantum mechanics coursework until I finally found 1.17 +the paper 1.18 +[[http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0103153][/Self-adjoint extensions of operators and the teaching of quantum 1.19 +mechanics/]], which helped me stamp out the bug entirely. I decided to 1.20 +write an article about the problem and its solution for a number of reasons: 1.21 + 1.22 +- Although the paper was not unreasonably dense, it was written for 1.23 + teachers. I wanted to write an article for students. 1.24 +- I wanted to popularize the problem and its solution because other 1.25 + explanations are currently too hard to find. (Even Shankar's 1.26 + excellent [[http://books.google.com/books/about/Principles_of_quantum_mechanics.html?id=2zypV5EbKuIC][textbook]] doesn't mention it.) 1.27 +- I wanted to check that the bug was indeed entirely 1.28 + eradicated. Attempting an explanation is my way of making 1.29 + sure. 1.30 + 1.31 +* COMMENT 1.32 + I recommend the 1.33 +paper not only for students who are learning 1.34 +quantum mechanics, but especially for teachers interested in debugging 1.35 +them. 1.36 + 1.37 +* COMMENT 1.38 +On my first exam in quantum mechanics, my professor asked us to 1.39 +describe how certain measurements would affect a particle in a 1.40 +box. Many of these measurement questions required routine application 1.41 +of skills we had recently learned\mdash{}first, you recall (or 1.42 +calculate) the eigenstates of the quantity 1.43 +to be measured; second, you write the given state as a linear 1.44 +sum of these eigenstates\mdash{} the coefficients on each term give 1.45 +the probability amplitude. 1.46 + 1.47 + 1.48 +* What I thought I knew 1.49 + 1.50 +The following is a list of things I thought were true of quantum 1.51 +mechanics; the catch is that the list contradicts itself. 1.52 + 1.53 +1. For any hermitian operator: Eigenstates with different eigenvalues are orthogonal. 1.54 +2. For any hermitian operator: Any physically allowed state can be 1.55 + written as a linear sum of eigenstates of the operator. 1.56 +3. The momentum operator and energy operator are hermitian, because 1.57 + momentum and energy are measureable quantities. 1.58 +4. In the vacuum potential, the momentum and energy operators have these eigenstates: 1.59 + - the momentum operator has an eigenstate 1.60 + \(p(x)=\exp{(ipx/\hbar)}\) for each value of $p$. 1.61 + - the energy operator has an eigenstate \(|E\rangle = 1.62 + \alpha|p\rangle + \beta|-p\rangle\) for any \(\alpha,\beta\) and 1.63 + the particular choice of momentum $p=\sqrt{2mE}$. 1.64 +5. In the infinitely deep potential well, the momentum and energy 1.65 + operators have these eigenstates: 1.66 + - The momentum eigenstates and energy eigenstates have the same form 1.67 + as in the vacuum potential: $p(x) = 1.68 + \exp{(ipx/\hbar)}$ and $|E\rangle = \alpha|p\rangle + \beta|-p\rangle$. 1.69 + - Even so, because of the boundary conditions on the 1.70 + well, we must make the following modifications: 1.71 + + Physically realistic states must be impossible to find outside the well. (Only a state of infinite 1.72 + energy could exist outside the well, and infinite energy is not 1.73 + realistic.) This requirement means, for example, that momentum 1.74 + eigenstates in the infinitely deep well must be 1.75 + \(p(x) 1.76 + = \begin{cases}\exp{(ipx/\hbar)},& \text{for }0\lt{}x\lt{}a; 1.77 + \\0, & \text{for }x<0\text{ or }x>a. \\ \end{cases}\) 1.78 + + Physically realistic states must vary smoothly throughout 1.79 + space. This means that if a particle in some state is very unlikely to be 1.80 + /at/ a particular location, it is also very unlikely be /near/ 1.81 + that location. Combining this requirement with the above 1.82 + requirement, we find that the momentum operator no longer has 1.83 + an eigenstate for each value of $p$; instead, only values of 1.84 + $p$ that are integer multiples of $\pi a/\hbar$ are physically 1.85 + realistic. Similarly, the energy operator no longer has an 1.86 + eigenstate for each value of $E$; instead, the only energy 1.87 + eigenstates in the infinitely deep well 1.88 + are $E_n(x)=\sin(n\pi x/ a)$ for positive integers $n$. 1.89 + 1.90 +* COMMENT: 1.91 + 1.92 +** Eigenstates with different eigenvalues are orthogonal 1.93 + 1.94 +#+begin_quote 1.95 +*Theorem:* Eigenstates with different eigenvalues are orthogonal. 1.96 +#+end_quote 1.97 + 1.98 +** COMMENT : 1.99 +I can prove this: if $\Lambda$ is any linear operator, suppose $|a\rangle$ 1.100 +and $|b\rangle$ are eigenstates of $\Lambda$. This means that 1.101 + 1.102 + 1.103 +\( 1.104 +\begin{eqnarray} 1.105 +\Lambda |a\rangle&=& a|a\rangle,\\ 1.106 +\Lambda|b\rangle&=& b|b\rangle.\\ 1.107 +\end{eqnarray} 1.108 +\) 1.109 + 1.110 +If we take the difference of these eigenstates, we find that 1.111 + 1.112 +\( 1.113 +\begin{eqnarray} 1.114 +\Lambda\;\left(|a\rangle-|b\rangle\right) &=& \Lambda |a\rangle - \Lambda |b\rangle 1.115 +\qquad \text{(because $\Lambda$ is linear.)}\\ 1.116 +&=& a|a\rangle - b|b\rangle\qquad\text{(because $|a\rangle$ and 1.117 +$|b\rangle$ are eigenstates of $\Lambda$)} 1.118 +\end{eqnarray}\) 1.119 + 1.120 + 1.121 +which means that $a\neq b$. 1.122 + 1.123 +** Eigenvectors of hermitian operators span the space of solutions 1.124 + 1.125 +#+begin_quote 1.126 +*Theorem:* If $\Omega$ is a hermitian operator, then every physically 1.127 + allowed state can be written as a linear sum of eigenstates of 1.128 + $\Omega$. 1.129 +#+end_quote 1.130 + 1.131 + 1.132 + 1.133 +** Momentum and energy are hermitian operators 1.134 +This ought to be true because hermitian operators correspond to 1.135 +observable quantities. Since we expect momentum and energy to be 1.136 +measureable quantities, we expect that there are hermitian operators 1.137 +to represent them. 1.138 + 1.139 + 1.140 +** Momentum and energy eigenstates in vacuum 1.141 +An eigenstate of the momentum operator $P$ would be a state 1.142 +\(|p\rangle\) such that \(P|p\rangle=p|p\rangle\). 1.143 + 1.144 +** Momentum and energy eigenstates in the infinitely deep well 1.145 + 1.146 + 1.147 + 1.148 +* Can you measure momentum in the infinitely deep well? 1.149 +In summary, I thought I knew: 1.150 +1. For any hermitian operator: eigenstates with different eigenvalues 1.151 + are orthogonal. 1.152 +2. For any hermitian operator: any physically realistic state can be 1.153 + written as a linear sum of eigenstates of the operator. 1.154 +3. The momentum operator and energy operator are hermitian, because 1.155 + momentum and energy are observable quantities. 1.156 +4. (The form of the momentum and energy eigenstates in the vacuum potential) 1.157 +5. (The form of the momentum and energy eigenstates in the infinitely deep well potential) 1.158 + 1.159 +Additionally, I understood that because the infinitely deep potential 1.160 +well is not realistic, states of such a system are not necessarily 1.161 +physically realistic. Instead, I understood 1.162 +\ldquo{}realistic states\rdquo{} to be those that satisfy the physically 1.163 +unrealistic Schr\ouml{}dinger equation and its boundary conditions. 1.164 + 1.165 +With that final caveat, here is the problem: 1.166 + 1.167 +According to (5), the momentum eigenstates in the well are 1.168 + 1.169 +\(p(x)= \begin{cases}\exp{(ipx/\hbar)},& \text{for }0\lt{}x\lt{}a;\\0, & \text{for }x<0\text{ or }x>a. \\ \end{cases}\) 1.170 + 1.171 +However, /these/ states are not orthogonal, which contradicts the 1.172 +assumption that (3) the momentum operator is hermitian and (2) 1.173 +eigenstates of a hermitian are orthogonal if they have different eigenvalues. 1.174 + 1.175 +#+begin_quote 1.176 +*Problem 1. The momentum eigenstates of the well are not orthogonal* 1.177 + 1.178 +/Proof./ If $p_1\neq p_2$, then 1.179 + 1.180 +\(\begin{eqnarray} 1.181 +\langle p_1 | p_2\rangle &=& \int_{\infty}^\infty p_1^*(x)p_2(x)dx\\ 1.182 +&=& \int_0^a p_1^*(x)p_2(x)dx\qquad\text{ Since }p_1(x)=p_2(x)=0\text{ 1.183 +outside the well.}\\ 1.184 +&=& \int_0^a \exp{(-ip_1x/\hbar)\exp{(ip_2x/\hbar)dx}} 1.185 +\end{eqnarray}\) 1.186 +$\square$ 1.187 + 1.188 +#+end_quote 1.189 + 1.190 + 1.191 + 1.192 +** COMMENT Momentum eigenstates 1.193 + 1.194 +In free space, the Hamiltonian is \(H=\frac{1}{2m}P^2\) and the 1.195 +momentum operator $P$ has eigenstates \(p(x) = \exp{(-ipx/\hbar)}\). 1.196 + 1.197 +In the infinitely deep potential well, the Hamiltonian is the same but 1.198 +there is a new condition in order for states to qualify as physically 1.199 +allowed: the states must not exist anywhere outside of well, as it 1.200 +takes an infinite amount of energy to do so. 1.201 + 1.202 +Notice that the momentum eigenstates defined above do /not/ satisfy 1.203 +this condition. 1.204 + 1.205 + 1.206 + 1.207 +* COMMENT 1.208 +For each physical system, there is a Schr\ouml{}dinger equation that 1.209 +describes how a particle's state $|\psi\rangle$ will change over 1.210 +time. 1.211 + 1.212 +\(\begin{eqnarray} 1.213 +i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t}|\psi\rangle &=& 1.214 +H |\psi\rangle \equiv\frac{P^2}{2m}|\psi\rangle+V|\psi\rangle \end{eqnarray}\) 1.215 + 1.216 +This is a differential equation; each solution to the 1.217 +Schr\ouml{}dinger equation is a state that is physically allowed for 1.218 +our particle. Here, physically allowed states are 1.219 +those that change in physically allowed ways. However, like any differential 1.220 +equation, the Schr\ouml{}dinger equation can be accompanied by 1.221 +/boundary conditions/\mdash{}conditions that further restrict which 1.222 +states qualify as physically allowed. 1.223 + 1.224 + 1.225 + 1.226 + 1.227 +** Eigenstates of momentum 1.228 + 1.229 + 1.230 + 1.231 + 1.232 +#In the infinitely deep well potential $V(x)=0$, the Schr\ouml{}dinger 1.233 + 1.234 +#\(i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}|\psi\rangle = H|\psi\rangle\) 1.235 + 1.236 + 1.237 + 1.238 + 1.239 + 1.240 + 1.241 + 1.242 +* COMMENT 1.243 + 1.244 +#* The infinite square well potential 1.245 + 1.246 +A particle exists in a potential that is 1.247 +infinite everywhere except for a region of length \(a\), where the potential is zero. This means that the 1.248 +particle exists in a potential[fn:coords][fn:infinity] 1.249 + 1.250 + 1.251 +\(V(x)=\begin{cases}0,&\text{for }\;0< x< a;\\\infty,&\text{for 1.252 +}\;x<0\text{ or }x>a.\end{cases}\) 1.253 + 1.254 +The Schr\ouml{}dinger equation describes how the particle's state 1.255 +\(|\psi\rangle\) will change over time in this system. 1.256 + 1.257 +\(\begin{eqnarray} 1.258 +i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t}|\psi\rangle &=& 1.259 +H |\psi\rangle \equiv\frac{P^2}{2m}|\psi\rangle+V|\psi\rangle \end{eqnarray}\) 1.260 + 1.261 +This is a differential equation; each solution to the 1.262 +Schr\ouml{}dinger equation is a state that is physically allowed for 1.263 +our particle. Here, physically allowed states are 1.264 +those that change in physically allowed ways. However, like any differential 1.265 +equation, the Schr\ouml{}dinger equation can be accompanied by 1.266 +/boundary conditions/\mdash{}conditions that further restrict which 1.267 +states qualify as physically allowed. 1.268 + 1.269 + 1.270 +Whenever possible, physicists impose these boundary conditions: 1.271 +- A physically allowed state ought to be a /smoothly-varying function of position./ This means 1.272 + that if a particle in the state is likely to be /at/ a particular location, 1.273 + it is also likely to be /near/ that location. 1.274 + 1.275 +These boundary conditions imply that for the square well potential in 1.276 +this problem, 1.277 + 1.278 +- Physically allowed states must be totally confined to the well, 1.279 + because it takes an infinite amount of energy to exist anywhere 1.280 + outside of the well (and physically allowed states ought to have 1.281 + only finite energy). 1.282 +- Physically allowed states must be increasingly unlikely to find very 1.283 + close to the walls of the well. This is because of two conditions: the above 1.284 + condition says that the particle is /impossible/ to find 1.285 + outside of the well, and the smoothly-varying condition says 1.286 + that if a particle is impossible to find at a particular location, 1.287 + it must be unlikely to be found nearby that location. 1.288 + 1.289 +#; physically allowed states are those that change in physically 1.290 +#allowed ways. 1.291 + 1.292 + 1.293 +#** Boundary conditions 1.294 +Because the potential is infinite everywhere except within the well, 1.295 +a realistic particle must be confined to exist only within the 1.296 +well\mdash{}its wavefunction must be zero everywhere beyond the walls 1.297 +of the well. 1.298 + 1.299 + 1.300 +[fn:coords] I chose my coordinate system so that the well extends from 1.301 +\(0<x<a\). Others choose a coordinate system so that the well extends from 1.302 +\(-\frac{a}{2}<x<\frac{a}{2}\). Although both coordinate systems describe the same physical 1.303 +situation, they give different-looking answers. 1.304 + 1.305 +[fn:infinity] Of course, infinite potentials are not 1.306 +realistic. Instead, they are useful approximations to finite 1.307 +potentials when \ldquo{}infinity\rdquo{} and \ldquo{}the actual height 1.308 +of the well\rdquo{} are close enough for your own practical 1.309 +purposes. Having introduced a physical impossibility into the problem 1.310 +already, we don't expect to get physically realistic solutions; we 1.311 +just expect to get mathematically consistent ones. The forthcoming 1.312 +trouble is that we don't.