Download PHYS6520 Quantum Mechanics II Spring 2013 HW #3

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Perturbation theory wikipedia , lookup

Copenhagen interpretation wikipedia , lookup

Quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup

Density of states wikipedia , lookup

Conservation of energy wikipedia , lookup

Relational approach to quantum physics wikipedia , lookup

EPR paradox wikipedia , lookup

Superconductivity wikipedia , lookup

Electrostatics wikipedia , lookup

Quantum electrodynamics wikipedia , lookup

Casimir effect wikipedia , lookup

Photon polarization wikipedia , lookup

Quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup

Quantum potential wikipedia , lookup

Renormalization wikipedia , lookup

Condensed matter physics wikipedia , lookup

Introduction to gauge theory wikipedia , lookup

Path integral formulation wikipedia , lookup

Fundamental interaction wikipedia , lookup

Classical mechanics wikipedia , lookup

Field (physics) wikipedia , lookup

Aharonov–Bohm effect wikipedia , lookup

Electromagnetism wikipedia , lookup

Mathematical formulation of the Standard Model wikipedia , lookup

Nuclear structure wikipedia , lookup

Quantum vacuum thruster wikipedia , lookup

Time in physics wikipedia , lookup

Theoretical and experimental justification for the Schrödinger equation wikipedia , lookup

Introduction to quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup

History of quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup

Relativistic quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup

Old quantum theory wikipedia , lookup

Hydrogen atom wikipedia , lookup

Canonical quantization wikipedia , lookup

T-symmetry wikipedia , lookup

Transcript
PHYS6520
Quantum Mechanics II
Spring 2013
HW #3
Due to the grader at 5pm on Friday 1 March 2013
(1)
(1) We discussed in class the first order energy shifts ∆K from “relativistic kinetic energy.”
(1)
We also discussed ∆LS from the spin-orbit interaction, but there was a problem in that it
gave a nonzero result for l = 0 states if we blindly let an l = 0 in the numerator cancel an
(1)
l = 0 in the denominator. In fact, ∆LS from (5.3.31) is invalid for l = 0. However, if we take
into account the spread of the electron wave function in the region of changing electric field,
we are led to include the “Darwin term” in the Hamiltonian. The perturbation is
VD = −
1
[pi , [pi , eφ(r)]]
8m2 c2
(1)
where a sum over i is implied and φ(r) is the Coulomb potential. Find ∆D and show that
it is only nonzero for l = 0 states, and that it gives exactly the same result as blindly using
(5.3.31) for l = 0. Then show that
(1)
∆nj
≡
(1)
∆K
+
(1)
∆LS
+
(1)
∆D
�
mc2 (Zα)4 3
1
=
−
3
2n
4n j + 1/2
�
Later on in this course we will compare this expression to the result of solving the Dirac
equation in the presence of the Coulomb potential.
(2) These questions are meant to associate numbers with atomic hydrogen phenomena.
(a) The red n = 3 → 2 Balmer transition has a wavelength λ ≈ 656 nm. Calculate the
wavelength difference ∆λ (in nm) between the 3p3/2 → 2s1/2 and 3p1/2 → 2s1/2 transitions
due to the spin-orbit interaction. Comment on how you might measure this splitting.
(b) How large an electric field E is needed so that the Stark splitting in the n = 2 level
is the same as the correction from relativistic kinetic energy between the 2s and 2p levels?
How easy or difficult is it to achieve an electric field of this magnitude in the laboratory?
(c) The Zeeman effect can be calculated with a “weak” or “strong” magnetic field, depending on the size of the energy shift relative to the spin-orbit splitting. Give examples of
a weak and a strong field. How easy or difficult is it to achieve such a magnetic field?
(3) Compute the Stark effect for the 2s1/2 and 2p1/2 levels of hydrogen. Assume that the
electric field E is sufficiently weak so that eEa0 is small compared to the fine structure, but
take the Lamb shift δ into account (that is, ignore 2p3/2 in this calculation). Show that for
eEa0 � δ, the energy shifts are quadratic in E, whereas for eEa0 � δ they are linear in E.
(4) Modern Quantum Mechanics, Problem 5.18
(5) Modern Quantum Mechanics, Problem 5.19
(6) Modern Quantum Mechanics, Problem 5.20