Chapter 7: Q18E (page 279)
For the cubic 3D infinite well wave function
show that the correct normalization constant is.
Short Answer
The normalization constant is .
/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none}
Learning Materials
Features
Discover
Chapter 7: Q18E (page 279)
For the cubic 3D infinite well wave function
show that the correct normalization constant is.
The normalization constant is .
All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.
Get started for free
The Diatomic Molecule: Exercise 80 discusses the idea of reduced mass. Classically or quantum mechanically, we can digest the behavior of a two-particle system into motion of the center of mass and motion relative to the center of mass. Our interest here is the relative motion, which becomes a one-particle problem if we merely use for the mass for that particle. Given this simplification, the quantum-mechanical results we have learned go a long way toward describing the diatomic molecule. To a good approximation, the force between the bound atoms is like an ideal spring whose potential energy is , where x is the deviation of the atomic separation from its equilibrium value, which we designate with an a. Thus,x=r-a . Because the force is always along the line connecting the two atoms, it is a central force, so the angular parts of the Schrödinger equation are exactly as for hydrogen, (a) In the remaining radial equation (7- 30), insert the potential energy and replace the electron massm with . Then, with the definition., show that it can be rewritten as
With the further definition show that this becomes
(b) Assume, as is quite often the case, that the deviation of the atoms from their equilibrium separation is very small compared to that separation—that is,x<<a. Show that your result from part (a) can be rearranged into a rather familiar- form, from which it follows that
(c)
Identify what each of the two terms represents physically.
At heart, momentum conservation is related to the universe being "translationally invariant," meaning that it is the same if you shift your coordinates to the right or left. Angular momentum relates to rotational invariance. Use these ideas to explain at least some of the differences between the physical properties quantized in the cubic three-dimensional box versus the hydrogen atom.
Doubly ionized lithium, absorbs a photon and jumps from the ground state to its n=2level. What was the wavelength of the photon?
For a hydrogen atom in the ground state. determine (a) the most probable location at which to find the electron and (b) the most probable radius at which to find the electron, (c) Comment on the relationship between your answers in parts (a) and (b).
Classically, an orbiting charged particle radiates electromagnetic energy, and for an electron in atomic dimensions, it would lead to collapse in considerably less than the wink of an eye.
(a) By equating the centripetal and Coulomb forces, show that for a classical charge -e of mass m held in a circular orbit by its attraction to a fixed charge +e, the following relationship holds
.
(b) Electromagnetism tells us that a charge whose acceleration is a radiates power . Show that this can also be expressed in terms of the orbit radius as . Then calculate the energy lost per orbit in terms of r by multiplying the power by the period and using the formula from part (a) to eliminate .
(c) In such a classical orbit, the total mechanical energy is half the potential energy, or . Calculate the change in energy per change in r : . From this and the energy lost per obit from part (b), determine the change in per orbit and evaluate it for a typical orbit radius of . Would the electron's radius change much in a single orbit?
(d) Argue that dividing by P and multiplying by dr gives the time required to change r by dr . Then, sum these times for all radii from to a final radius of 0. Evaluate your result for . (One limitation of this estimate is that the electron would eventually be moving relativistically).
What do you think about this solution?
We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.