| Quantum Mechanics for Engineers 5.53 alpha |
|
© Leon van Dommelen |
|
A.30 The evolution of probability
This note looks at conservation of probability, and the resulting
definitions of the reflection and transmission coefficients in
scattering. It also explains the concept of the “probability
current” that you may occasionally run into.
For the unsteady Schrödinger equation to provide a physically
correct description of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, particles
should not be able to disappear into thin air. In particular, during
the evolution of the wave function of a single particle, the total
probability of finding the particle if you look everywhere should stay
one at all times:
Fortunately, the Schrödinger equation
does indeed conserve this total probability, so all is well.
To verify this, note first that
, where the star
indicates the complex conjugate, so
To get an expression for that, take the Schrödinger equation above
times
and add the complex conjugate of the
Schrödinger equation,
times
. The potential energy terms drop out, and what
is left is
Now it can be verified by differentiating out that the right hand side
can be rewritten as a derivative:
 |
(A.231) |
For reasons that will become evident below,
is called the
“probability current.” Note that
, like
, will be zero
at infinite
for proper, normalized wave functions.
If (A.231) is integrated over all
, the desired result
is obtained:
Therefore, the total probability of finding the particle does not
change with time. If a proper initial condition is provided to the
Schrödinger equation in which the total probability of finding the
particle is one, then it stays one for all time.
It gets a little more interesting to see what happens to the
probability of finding the particle in some given finite region
. That probability is given by
and it can change with time. A wave packet might enter or leave the
region. In particular, integration of (A.231) gives
This can be understood as follows:
is the probability flowing
out of the region
into the interval
through the end
. That increases the probability within
. Similarly,
is the probability flowing out of
at
into the region
; it decreases the probability within
. Now you see why
is called probability current; it is equivalent to a stream of
probability in the positive
-direction.
The probability current can be generalized to more dimensions using
vector calculus:
 |
(A.232) |
and the net probability flowing out of a region is given by
 |
(A.233) |
where
is the outside surface area of the region, and
is a
unit vector normal to the surface. A surface integral like this can
often be simplified using the divergence (Gauss or whatever) theorem
of calculus.
Returning to the one-dimensional case, it is often desirable to relate
conservation of probability to the energy eigenfunctions of the
Hamiltonian,
because the energy eigenfunctions are generic, not specific to one
particular example wave function
.
To do so, first an important quantity called the “Wronskian” must be introduced. Consider any two eigenfunctions
and
of the Hamiltonian:
If you multiply the first equation above by
, the second by
and then subtract the two, you get
The constant
can be divided out, and by differentiation
it can be verified that the remainder can be written as
The quantity
is called the Wronskian. It is the same at all
values of
.
As an application, consider the example potential of figure
A.11 in addendum {A.25} that bounces a particle
coming in from the far left back to where it came from. In the left
region, the potential
has a constant value
. In this region,
an energy eigenfunction is of the form
At the far right, the potential grows without bound and the
eigenfunction becomes zero rapidly. To make use of the Wronskian,
take the first solution
to be
itself, and
to be its complex conjugate
. Since at the far right the
eigenfunction becomes zero rapidly, the Wronskian is zero there. And
since the Wronskian is constant, that means it must be zero
everywhere. Next, if you plug the above expression for the
eigenfunction in the left region into the definition of the Wronskian
and clean up, you get
If that is zero, the magnitude of
must be the
same as that of
.
This can be understood as follows: if a wave packet is created from
eigenfunctions with approximately the same energy, then the terms
combine for large
negative times into a wave packet coming in from the far left. The
probability of finding the particle in that wave packet is
proportional to the integrated square magnitude of the wave function,
hence proportional to the square magnitude of
.
For large positive times, the
terms combine in a
similar wave packet, but one that returns towards the far left. The
probability of finding the particle in that departing wave packet must
still be the same as that for the incoming packet, so the square
magnitude of
must be the same as that of
.
Next consider a generic scattering potential like the one in figure
7.22. To the far left, the eigenfunction is again of the
form
while at the far right it is now of the form
The Wronskian can be found the same way as before:
The fraction of the incoming wave packet that ends up being reflected
back towards the far left is called the “reflection coefficient”
. Following the same reasoning as
above, it can be computed from the coefficients in the far left region
of constant potential as:
The reflection coefficient gives the probability that the particle can
be found to the left of the scattering region at large times.
Similarly, the fraction of the incoming wave packet that passes
through the potential barrier towards the far right is called the
“transmission coefficient”
. It gives the probability that
the particle can be found to the right of the scattering region at
large times. Because of conservation of probability,
.
Alternatively, because of the Wronskian expression above, the
transmission coefficient can be explicitly computed from the
coefficient of the eigenfunction in the far right region as
If the potential energy is the same at the far right and far left, the
two classical momenta are the same,
.
Otherwise, the reason that the ratio of classical momenta appears in
the transmission coefficient is because the classical momenta in a
wave packet have a different spacing with respect to energy if the
potential energy is different. (The above expression for the
transmission coefficient can also be derived explicitly using the
Parseval equality of Fourier analysis, instead of inferred from
conservation of probability and the constant Wronskian.)