1
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to solve an excercise that involves first order perturbation theory and an infinite potential. To ease the problem, I tried to consider an easier one dimensional model. Consider an infinite square well potential $$V(x) = \begin{cases} 0\quad \text{if } 0<x<a \\ +\infty \quad \text{elsewhere} \end{cases} $$ which has ground state wavefunction $\psi_0$ and energy $E_0$. Now, the potential is perturbed and becomes $$V'(x) = \begin{cases} 0\quad \text{if } 0<x<a+\varepsilon \\ +\infty \quad \text{elsewhere} \end{cases} $$ where $\varepsilon \ll a$. What is the first order correction to the energy $E_0$? I know that for the infinite square well this problem can be solved analytically, but I'm trying to solve the same problem with a worse potential and it is required to use perturbation theory. My problem is that I'm not able to write the Hamiltonian as a sum of the potential plus a perturbation, since we are given directly the perturbated potential. What I tried is the following: I multiplied the unperturbated potential with a function $A(x)$ that is 0 between $a$ and $a+\varepsilon$, and 1 elsewhere. I wrote this function using the Heaviside $\theta(x)$: $$A(x) = \theta(-x+a)+\theta(x-a-\varepsilon) $$ such that I obtain $$A(x)V(x) = V(x)\theta(-x+a) + V(x)\theta(x-a-\varepsilon) $$ which is now a sum of almost the initial potential and another term but the problem is that the product $0\cdot +\infty$ is not well defined, so I don't think this is the correct approch. Do you have a better idea to approch this problem?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure you can do this in a well-defined way with an infinite potential. You could do it for a finite potential well and then take the limit, though. $\endgroup$ – J. Murray Mar 18 '18 at 20:48
  • $\begingroup$ I agree with you, I tried using V'(x)- V(x) as suggested by the answer below, but I alway get infinite, no matter what. Unfortunately my excercise has an infinite potential link $\endgroup$ – user85231 Mar 18 '18 at 21:13
  • $\begingroup$ That exercise is a deformation in shape, not merely in radius - the suggestion given as a hint should be the way to go. $\endgroup$ – J. Murray Mar 18 '18 at 21:16
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah, I can guess that I should follow the hint, but I don't know how, if you write the Hamiltonian $H+V$, even if you are able to write the ellipsoid such that the sphere is a limit, I don't see how it is possible to get the form $H+V_0 + V'$ such that I can use perturbation theory $\endgroup$ – user85231 Mar 18 '18 at 21:22
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think that's the idea of the exercise. If you transform to coordinates $(x,y,u)$ (where $u=az/b$) then the problem is spherical again. You can then perturb the ground state wavefunction and apply the Hamiltonian operator to it. $\endgroup$ – J. Murray Mar 18 '18 at 21:31
0
$\begingroup$

It will help you to think in terms of V'(X) - V(X) .... Where is this function zero and where is it not? Where it is not, note that it takes a familiar form (up to a minus sign). It may look "bad," however your first order energy shift will involve the unperturbed wave function - for the infinite well you will find, then, that it is easy to work out the correction.....

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ By the way, there is nothing perturbative in your set up - what is the parameter in which you would make your expansion (epsilon cannot be used because it doesn't multiply the difference between potentials) $\endgroup$ – lux Mar 18 '18 at 17:19
  • $\begingroup$ I don't get how you can solve the problem in this way. First, if you calculate $V'(x) - V(x) $ you have substraction between infinites, which is not well defined, then how can this help writing the Hamiltonian in the form $H_0 + W$, where $W$ is the perturbation? What should I use in the perturbation formula $\langle\psi|W|\psi\rangle$? $\endgroup$ – user85231 Mar 18 '18 at 18:56
  • $\begingroup$ Since you want to compare like for like think of (both) infinite square wells in terms of a limit that their depth, H, goes to infinity (at the end of the calculation). This is justified since you are interested in the (non-adiabatic) change in the well's width, not it's height. You'll see that your W is not a perturbation, since it involves the height H which is a large parameter. However if you keep H large but finite and use your formula above you will see that there is actually nothing to do - don't forget the psi are the unperturbed wavefunctions..... think carefully about their form. $\endgroup$ – lux Mar 18 '18 at 19:10
  • $\begingroup$ Your comments don't make sense. I really don't understand how your comments should help solving the perturbation problem $\endgroup$ – user85231 Mar 18 '18 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ Nevermind my comment, maybe I understood, but when you calculate the integral, you still have an infinite quantity... $\endgroup$ – user85231 Mar 18 '18 at 19:47
0
$\begingroup$

There is a related problem that sugests how to to proceed. I learned it from Alan MacKane and I think he told me that he found it in a paper by Sidney Coleman:

Let $\psi_\lambda(x)$ be a normalized bound-state solution to the Schr{\"o}dinger equation on the entire real line $$ [-\partial_x^2 +q(x)]\psi_\lambda=\lambda \psi_\lambda, \quad \psi_\lambda\in {\rm L}^2({\mathbb R}), $$ with $ \psi_\lambda(x) \sim Ae^{-\beta|x|}$ at large $|x|$. Then the small shift in $\lambda$ that arises from confining the system in a box of length $L$, so that $\psi_{\lambda+\delta\lambda}(L/2)=\psi_{\lambda+\delta\lambda}(-L/2)=0$, is $$ \delta \lambda \sim 4A^2 \beta e^{-\beta L}. $$ This is another case where the potential perturbation is infinite even though $1/L$ is a small parameter.

To obtain this result, we proceed as follows: We need to change $\lambda$ so that a solution that is zero at $x=-L/2$ evolves to zero at $x=+L/2$. To do this we require a Green function for the initial value problem $$ [-\partial_x^2 +q(x)-\lambda]\psi=f(x),\qquad \psi(-L/2)=0. $$ To construct the Green function we make use of the second solution
$$ \chi_\lambda(x) \propto \psi_\lambda(x) \int^x_0 [\psi_\lambda(\xi)]^{-2} d\xi, $$ which we scale so that $$ \chi_\lambda(x)\sim {\rm sgn}(x) A e^{\beta |x|}, \quad |x| \gg 0. $$ The initial-value Green function is then $$ G(x,\xi) = \frac{1}{2A^2\beta}[ \psi_\lambda(x) \chi_\lambda(\xi)-\chi_\lambda(x) \psi_\lambda(\xi)] \theta(x-\xi), $$ where $2A^2\beta$ is the Wronskian $W[\psi_\lambda, \chi_\lambda]$.

Now
$$ \phi(x)= \frac 1{2A} \left(e^{\beta L/2}\psi_\lambda(x)+e^{-\beta L/2}\chi_\lambda(x)\right) $$ is zero at $x=-L/2$ and unity at $x=+L/2$.
We use $G(x,\xi)$ with $f(x) \to \delta\lambda\, \phi(x)$ to solve, to first order in $\delta\lambda$, the equation with $\lambda \to \lambda+\delta \lambda$ and $ \psi_{\lambda+\delta\lambda}(-L/2)=0$. We obtain
$$ \psi_{\lambda+\delta\lambda}(x) = \phi(x) +\delta \lambda \int_{-L/2}^x \frac{1}{2A^2\beta}[ \psi_\lambda(x) \chi_\lambda(\xi)-\chi_\lambda(x) \psi_\lambda(\xi)] \phi(\xi)\,d\xi. $$

By construction this $\psi_{\lambda+\delta\lambda}(x) $ satisfies the boundary condition at $x=-L/2$, while at $x=+L/2$ we have $$ \psi_{\lambda+\delta\lambda}(L/2) = \phi(L/2)+\delta\lambda \int_{-L/2}^{L/2}\frac{1}{2A^2\beta} \left[ \textstyle{\frac 12} e^{-\beta L}\chi_\lambda^2(\xi)- \textstyle{\frac 12} e^{\beta L} \psi^2_\lambda(\xi)\right]\,d\xi. $$ Now $\phi(L/2)=1$, $$ e^{-\beta L} \int_{-L/2}^{L/2} \chi_\lambda ^2(\xi)\,d\xi $$ is $O(1)$ and so is negligible compared to the $e^{\beta L}$ term, and $$ \int_{-L/2}^{L/2} \psi^2_\lambda(\xi)\,d\xi\sim 1 $$ by the normalization assumption. Thus $$ \psi_{\lambda+\delta\lambda}(L/2)= 1 - \frac{\delta\lambda}{4A^2\beta} e^{\beta L}+O(\delta\lambda^2). $$ Requiring this to be zero gives $$ \delta \lambda = 4A^2 \beta e^{-\beta L}, $$ as claimed.

So you can do essentially the same thing for your $\epsilon$ boundary shift.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.