Skip to main content
edited tags
Link
Qmechanic
  • 212.9k
  • 48
  • 589
  • 2.3k
edited tags
Link
Qmechanic
  • 212.9k
  • 48
  • 589
  • 2.3k
Tweeted twitter.com/StackPhysics/status/862112818547634177
Post Merged (destination) from physics.stackexchange.com/questions/75527/…
Minor fixes.
Source Link
Emilio Pisanty
  • 135.4k
  • 33
  • 358
  • 677

I was recently reading Griffith Introduction to Quantum MechanicsGriffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics, and I stuck upon a following sentence:

"...but $\Psi$ must go to zero as $x$ does to $\pm\infty$ - otherwise the wave function wound not be normalizable."

but $\Psi$ must go to zero as $x$ goes to $\pm\infty$ - otherwise the wave function would not be normalizable.

The author also added a footer: "A good mathematician can supply you with pathological counterexamples, but they do not arise in physics (...)".

Can anybody give such a counterexample?

Best, Nick

I was recently reading Griffith Introduction to Quantum Mechanics, and I stuck upon a following sentence:

"...but $\Psi$ must go to zero as $x$ does to $\pm\infty$ - otherwise the wave function wound not be normalizable."

The author also added a footer: "A good mathematician can supply you with pathological counterexamples, but they do not arise in physics (...)".

Can anybody give such a counterexample?

Best, Nick

I was recently reading Griffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics, and I stuck upon a following sentence:

but $\Psi$ must go to zero as $x$ goes to $\pm\infty$ - otherwise the wave function would not be normalizable.

The author also added a footer: "A good mathematician can supply you with pathological counterexamples, but they do not arise in physics (...)".

Can anybody give such a counterexample?

Source Link
xletmjm
  • 885
  • 7
  • 11
Loading