GR9277 #29
|
|
|
Alternate Solutions |
There are no Alternate Solutions for this problem. Be the first to post one! |
|
Comments |
RusFortunat 2015-10-22 13:22:39 | \"An attractive, one dimensional square well\" I find it attractive too. | | psychonautQQ 2013-11-28 15:39:39 | Is eliminating option A based on the fact that a bound state should go towards zero outside of the well correct?
RusFortunat 2015-10-22 13:30:14 |
Read first sentence from the top.
|
| | maryami 2011-03-24 01:32:09 | in xx2 , the wave decays as E<0 and in x1
maryami 2011-03-29 15:05:17 |
so sorry, I don't know why it is typed incomplete,I 'm not familiar with the format of Latex
|
| | e2ka 2009-10-05 13:42:14 | "Tunneling should show exponential decay for a finite-potential well, and thus choice (E) is eliminated"rnrnIs function E not demonstrating exponential decay for x < x1, x > x2? It looks to me like . There must be a better explanation for eliminating E.
kroner 2009-10-05 14:32:34 |
The behavior in (E) isn't really exponential decay. It's oscillating, and although the oscillations seem to decay, that's not the behavior exhibited in tunneling.
If you're looking for more detail about the physics behind that, the gist of it is that in the region outside the well, the eigenstates have to satisfy where < . That has solutions of the form where is strictly real.
|
| | eshaghoulian 2007-09-22 16:38:58 | Choice D is eliminated more rigorously by invoking the property that the derivative of a wavefunction need be continuous (except at infinite potentials). This wavefunction is not even differentiable at and .
RusFortunat 2015-10-22 13:18:57 |
yep
|
| | Ingrid 2006-03-30 15:29:23 | Choice (A) is easy to rule out because the wave function should tend to sero for x-> +/-infinity.
zaijings 2009-03-13 19:23:52 |
you are right.
|
Plantis 2010-04-03 16:28:46 |
I think that (A) is correct answer too. What differnce between (A) and (B). I think - no difference.
|
raevyn 2010-04-08 13:40:31 |
Plantis, choice (A) does not go to zero at the "tails" (for < and > )
|
shak 2010-08-29 15:55:08 |
right
|
Crand0r 2010-11-12 18:39:13 |
On the other hand, wavefunctions are often drawn on pictures as if the "0" were the corresponding energy level. Given that, I think the question was poorly written.
|
| |
|
Post A Comment! |
|
Bare Basic LaTeX Rosetta Stone
|
LaTeX syntax supported through dollar sign wrappers $, ex., $\alpha^2_0$ produces .
|
type this... |
to get... |
$\int_0^\infty$ |
|
$\partial$ |
|
$\Rightarrow$ |
|
$\ddot{x},\dot{x}$ |
|
$\sqrt{z}$ |
|
$\langle my \rangle$ |
|
$\left( abacadabra \right)_{me}$ |
|
$\vec{E}$ |
|
$\frac{a}{b}$ |
|
|
|
|
|
The Sidebar Chatbox...
Scroll to see it, or resize your browser to ignore it... |
|
|