GR9277 #29



Alternate Solutions 
There are no Alternate Solutions for this problem. Be the first to post one! 

Comments 
RusFortunat 20151022 13:22:39  \"An attractive, one dimensional square well\" I find it attractive too.   psychonautQQ 20131128 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 20151022 13:30:14 
Read first sentence from the top.

  maryami 20110324 01:32:09  in xx2 , the wave decays as E<0 and in x1
maryami 20110329 15:05:17 
so sorry, I don't know why it is typed incomplete,I 'm not familiar with the format of Latex

  e2ka 20091005 13:42:14  "Tunneling should show exponential decay for a finitepotential 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 20091005 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 20070922 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 20151022 13:18:57 
yep

  Ingrid 20060330 15:29:23  Choice (A) is easy to rule out because the wave function should tend to sero for x> +/infinity.
zaijings 20090313 19:23:52 
you are right.

Plantis 20100403 16:28:46 
I think that (A) is correct answer too. What differnce between (A) and (B). I think  no difference.

raevyn 20100408 13:40:31 
Plantis, choice (A) does not go to zero at the "tails" (for < and > )

shak 20100829 15:55:08 
right

Crand0r 20101112 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... 

