Classical vs quantum harmonic oscillator. Correspondance principle
(Difference between revisions)
(→Brief digression, the astounding cancelation properties of Hermite polynomials) |
(→Classical versus Quantum harmonic oscillator) |
||
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
===Classical versus Quantum harmonic oscillator === | ===Classical versus Quantum harmonic oscillator === | ||
+ | We've seen two ways to write the equations of motion for the classical SHO: | ||
− | + | Newtonian: <math> m \ddot{x} = - k x </math> (assuming the equilibrium position is 0) | |
+ | |||
+ | Hamiltonian: <math> H,p = \dot{x} \hspace{5mm} -H,x = \dot{p} </math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | where <math> H,p \equiv \frac{\partial H}{\partial p} </math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | For the classical harmonic oscillator, the |
Revision as of 15:21, 31 March 2006
some key ideas on the harmonic oscillator
- ω / is the natural frequency of the oscillator. This
is a property of the potential. Remember, for small displacements from equilibrium: x0.
Hence the force associatd with the potential is:
where
- in 1D the QHO has an infinite series of equally spaced energy levels:
- many of the calculations become simpler if we introduce dimensionless
variables
In particular, you can show that:
Variance Variance
This is a striking result since it says that for energy eigenstates, nature will not allow us to sacrafice knowledge of one variable, in order to gain knowledge of the other.
Brief digression, the astounding cancelation properties of Hermite polynomials
Download try this yourself |
Classical versus Quantum harmonic oscillator
We've seen two ways to write the equations of motion for the classical SHO:
Newtonian: (assuming the equilibrium position is 0)
Hamiltonian: Failed to parse (Cannot write to or create math temp directory): H,p = \dot{x} \hspace{5mm} -H,x = \dot{p}
where
For the classical harmonic oscillator, the