Chapter 7: Q8P (page 308)
Evaluate and (Equations and ). Check your answers against Equations and .
Short Answer
Equations and matches the two integrals, and the results are the same.
Chapter 7: Q8P (page 308)
Evaluate and (Equations and ). Check your answers against Equations and .
Equations and matches the two integrals, and the results are the same.
All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.
Get started for freeThe fundamental problem in harnessing nuclear fusion is getting the two particles (say, two deuterons) close enough together for the attractive (but short-range) nuclear force to overcome the Coulomb repulsion. The “bulldozer” method is to heat the particles up to fantastic temperatures and allow the random collisions to bring them together. A more exotic proposal is muon catalysis, in which we construct a “hydrogen molecule ion,” only with deuterons in place of protons, and a muon in place of the electron. Predict the equilibrium separation distance between the deuterons in such a structure, and explain why muons are superior to electrons for this purpose.
Apply the techniques of this Section to the and ions (each has two electrons, like helium, but nuclear charges Z=1and Z=3, respectively). Find the effective (partially shielded) nuclear charge, and determine the best upper bound on , for each case. Comment: In the case of you should find that , which would appear to indicate that there is no bound state at all, since it would be energetically favourable for one electron to fly off, leaving behind a neutral hydrogen atom. This is not entirely surprising, since the electrons are less strongly attracted to the nucleus than they are in helium, and the electron repulsion tends to break the atom apart. However, it turns out to be incorrect. With a more sophisticated trial wave function (see Problem 7.18) it can be shown that and hence that a bound state does exist. It's only barely bound however, and there are no excited bound states, so has no discrete spectrum (all transitions are to and from the continuum). As a result, it is difficult to study in the laboratory, although it exists in great abundance on the surface of the sun.
Suppose you’re given a two-level quantum system whose (time-independent) Hamiltonian admits just two Eigen states, (with energy ), and (with energy ). They are orthogonal, normalized, and non-degenerate (assume is the smaller of the two energies). Now we turn on a perturbation H′, with the following matrix elements:
(7.74).
where h is some specified constant.
(a) Find the exact Eigen values of the perturbed Hamiltonian.
(b) Estimate the energies of the perturbed system using second-order perturbation theory.
(c) Estimate the ground state energy of the perturbed system using the variation principle, with a trial function of the form
(7.75).
where ϕ is an adjustable parameter. Note: Writing the linear combination in this way is just a neat way to guarantee that ψ is normalized.
(d) Compare your answers to (a), (b), and (c). Why is the variational principle so accurate, in this case?
As an explicit example of the method developed inProblem 7.15, consider an electron at rest in a uniform magnetic field for which the Hamiltonian is (Equation 4.158):
(4.158).
(7.57).
The eigenspinors, arelocalid="1655969802629" given in Equation 4.161. Now we turn on a perturbation, in the form of a uniform field in the x direction:
(4.161).
(7.58).
(a) Find the matrix elements of H′, and confirm that they have the structure of Equation 7.55. What is h?
(b) Using your result inProblem 7.15(b), find the new ground state energy, in second-order perturbation theory.
(c) Using your result inProblem 7.15(c), find the variation principle bound on the ground state energy.
Find the lowest bound on the ground state of hydrogen you can get using a Gaussian trial wave function
,
where A is determined by normalization and b is an adjustable parameter. Answer
What do you think about this solution?
We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.