SM358 2014 Solutions

NB: Please do not assume these are 100% correct, mistakes can be made! Q11, Q12 and
Q17 are omitted from these solutions; please ask your tutor if you require solutions for these.

Question 1
The energy equation is taken from the equation booklet as

Since we can use from the equation booklet also, we just plug in the value for
Hence the energy of the particle is;
(

)(

Similarly for momentum in the -direction we take the formula from the equation
booklet as

Where

is given in the question, hence;

(
)(

NB: a unit change has occurred to allow for SI units of momentum.

Since were dealing with a de Broglie wave equation, the de Broglie wavelength is
associated with the following equation (not in the equation booklet)

Therefore, the de Broglie wavelength is

Question 2
a) For a single particle in one dimension, described by the wavefunction ( ),
Borns rule is the probability that at time , finding the particle in a small interval
centered on is given by
| ( )|
b) For the given wavefunction we have
| |

Hence we integrate between zero and

to get

[
[

]
]

Thus the probability of finding the particle between zero and

is

Question 3
a) The coefficient should be equal to zero. This is because this part of the equation
concerns a representation of a moving beam in the region where
where we
would not expect there to be one given the wavefunction.
(For more clarification see Book 1, page 186)

b) The boundary conditions for

require that
( ) is continuous everywhere
( ) is continuous where the potential energy function is finite.
So for

we are left with the two relations:

( )
( )

Dividing equation 2 by gives

(

Putting equation 1 in to equation 2b gives

This can be rearranged for

(
(

)
)

to give
( )

Putting equation 3 into equation 1 gives

(
(

)
)

Factorising gives
(
Since

(
(

)
)
)
) (

) this gives

Therefore we can express B and C in terms of A as

(
(

)
)

Question 4
a) The coefficient rule is used to determine | | since we are told the energy
eigenfunctions are normalized.
For normalization we require
|

|
| |

| |

Hence
| |
The probability of obtaining
|

( )|

is

| |

The probability of obtaining

|

( )|

is

| |

The probability of obtaining

|

( )|

is

| |

To check, all the probabilities add up to 1 which is expected.

b) The expectation is given as

So,

( )

Therefore the expectation value of energy in the state

) is

Question 5
a) We have the operators

So
[ ]

( )

Since

we get

[ ]

as required.

b) The generalized Ehrenfest Theorem is

[ ]

So

[ ]

Where

Thus

[(

(
[(
[
[
So finally,

)(

)(
(

)
]

)
)

)
)(

)
( )

)]
)]

Question 6
a) For an eigenvalue equation we require
( )
( )
Where is a quantum mechanical operator and
eigenfunction ( ).

is the eigenvalue to the

Thus for the given function we have

(
(

)
(

)
(
)

Since the original function is returned,

eigenvalue of
.
b) The allowed values of

) is an eigenfunction of with an

are

An electron is a charged particle, which has angular momentum; when moving in a

loop this gives rise to a magnetic field. Therefore it is natural to expect
to be
dependent on the orbital angular momentum quantum number, where for any state
there are
possible values of .

Question 7
a) For an antisymmetric function we require
(
)
(
)
(

We construct
(

) by swapping
( )

If we multiply this by
(

with

( )

and visa versa such that we have

( )

( ))

as per the condition for antisymmetry we get

( )

(
(

( )

( )
( )

Therefore it is clear to see that

antisymmetric.

( )

( ))

( )

( ))

) and so the function is

b) Spin 1/2 fermions must have a total antisymmetric wavefunction. Since the spatial
wavefunction is antisymmetry then we require the spin wavefunction to be symmetric
such that:
(See Book 2, Page 115)

c) We have a description of a spin state as |

Since we have a triplet state for the symmetric spin wavefunction we have
|
Hence

|
and

Question 8
Ive added an explanation for revision purposes you dont need to justify the answers in the exam.

a) False Entanglement is independent of basis

b) True Ekert relies on entanglement
c) False We entangle photons 2&3, send photon 1&2 to Alice and 3 to Bob. Alice
never knows the state of photon 1 (See Book 2, exercise 7.17)
d) False Violating Bells inequality proves no hidden-variables
e) True Results showed to be violating the CHSH inequality of | |

Question 9
From the equation booklet we have
||
|
For an estimate of the ground state energy we therefore have
||
|
(
)
(

is the minimum value from the trial function, hence the exact ground state energy
can be less than or equal to the estimate of (

Question 10
a) Born-Oppenheimer treats nuclei in solids as being in fixed positions allowing
electronic energy eigenfunctions & eigenvalues to be obtained. The timeindependent Schrodinger equation splits into two parts, one for electrons and one for
nuclei; the energy eigenfunctions of electrons depend then upon the nuclear
positions and are therefore treated as functions rather than constants
(For clarity, seek the Glossary)
b)
is a diatomic molecule so we have 14 electrons to handle. For molecular
orbitals the holds 2 electrons and the holds 4 electrons; hence our ground state
configuration is

The formal bond order is therefore

(
((

Therefore

has a formal bond order of 3.

)
)

))

Question 13
a) The time-independent Schrodinger equation is
( )

( )

where the potential energy has been omitted as ( )

inside the well.

Substituting in the wavefunction gives

))

))

This becomes

( (

) )

))

Since we have the original wavefunction returned we can divide through by

leaving us with the energy eigenfunction

which is in agreement with the equation booklet.

( )

b) For

we have

( )

Thus, the expectation value of

( )

is calculated by a sandwich integral:

( )

))

))

Here we change the variable of integration such that

Hence we obtain

Using the given integral, this evaluates as

) [

For the expectation value of

( )

we use the sandwich integral

( )
(

))

))

Using the same change of variable as before, we have

(
)

Using the given integral, this evaluates as

So finally, the calculate the uncertainty in

(

[(

)
])
)

( ) ]

]
we have

c) The time-dependent Schrodinger equation is

(

Where again, the potential energy has been omitted since ( )

(

Substituting in

( )

( )

) gives

inside the well.

( )

Rearranged this becomes

( )

( )

Dealing with the LHS;

( )

)
( )

( )

Dealing with the RHS:

(

( )

This can be written as

(

( )]

)[

Where the square bracketed term has been shown to equal

the RHS finally becomes
(

( )

( )

( ) in part (a). Thus

Finally, since both LHS and RHS are equal and proven to be equal, then
be a solution to the time-dependent Schrodinger equation.

) must

Question 14
a) We start first by stating the operator is:

) (

To find the expectation value of we require the sandwich integral

( )

For the first excited state,

( )(

( )
( )
(

))

( )

Inspecting the raising and lowering operators, and via orthogonality we see that
( )( )

( )

( )( )

( )

This leaves

( )(

[
[

(
( )
( )

))
( )

( )

Again, via orthogonality we have

( )

( )

So finally, for the first excited state we have

( )
( )
( )

( )

( )
]

We follow the same procedure for the second excited state,

( )(

))

( )
( )

Inspecting the raising and lowering operators, and via orthogonality we see that
( )( )

( )

( )( )

( )

This leaves

( )(

[
[

(
( )
( )

))
( )

( )

Again, via orthogonality we have

( )

( )

So finally, for the second excited state we have

( )
( )
( )

( )

( )
]

b)

For the given wavefunction, the probability of each energy is the square of the
coefficient such that
(

Thus, to find the expectation value we have

)(

c) We recognize that via orthogonality, the operator returns a coefficient of the

wavefunction that it acts up, which for the purpose of the explanation we will call it
So for the given sandwich integrals we then have

As

( )

is odd, so is

( )

. Similarly, since

( )

( )

is even then

is also even.

Thus, both integrands are the product of an odd function with an even function which
produces an odd integrand. When an odd function is differentiated centered on a
region then this is equal to zero such that

Hence

( )

( )

( )

( )

d)

[(

( )

( )

( ))] [
( ))]

[(

(
( )

( )

( ))]
( ))]

Expanding out the integral gives

( )

( )

( )

( )

( )

( )
( )

( )

Realising the result from part (c) we have

( )

( )

( )

( )

The first integral represents for the first excited state in part (a) and the second
integral represents for the second excited state in part (a). Hence we have

By substituting

into

gives

Classically,

Putting

into this gives

Since we found

as required.

in part (b) it follows that

Question 15
a) The time-independent Schrodinger equation is
|
|
We have the two spinors, which we label arbitrarily as
|

[ ]

[ ]

For |
|

[ ]

This becomes
[

][ ]

[ ]

Dividing through by
[

][ ]

[ ]

Dealing with just the LHS:

[

][ ]

[ ]

So in this case, by inspection it is clear that

For |
|

[ ]

This becomes
[

][ ]

[ ]

Dividing through by
[

][ ]

[ ]

Dealing with just the LHS:

[

][ ]

[ ]

So in this case, by inspection it is clear that

For the x-direction, we remember that

equations from the equation booklet
( )
| [
| [
]
( ) ( )

and

such that we use the

( ) ( )
]
( )

Hence
|

(( ) )
]
( ) (( ) )

( )

(( ) )
]
(( ) )

[ ]
[

Performing the checks for orthonormality we have

][ ]

][

][

Since | |
two are orthogonal

]
]

then they are normalised and as

then the

b) We have
|

[ ]

To express this as a linear combination of spin states we require

|

where

|
and

are to be determined.

][ ]

][ ]

Hence,
|

((

)|

)|

c) For any time we require

|

)|

)|

Thus putting in the energy values and coefficients gives

|

((

we arrive back at |

For
For

)|

)|

we have
|

((

( )
)|

Using Eulers formula this reduces to

|

)(

((

)|

((

)|

)( )|

)|

As
|

[ ]

(
[
(

((

)[ ]

) (
) (

)
]
)

)[

])

( )
)|

Question 16
a) The state is entangled because it cannot be represented as the product of a ket
describing photon 1 and a ket describing photon 2.
We can also check entanglement by the determinant of the state where we have
|

Entanglement occurs when |

For our state we have

confirming that the state is indeed entangled.

and so |

Eckerts method relies upon entanglement where a source creates a pair of photons
in a particular entangled state. One photon is sent to Alice and the other sent to Bob
both measure the linear polarization of their photon in one of three independently
and randomly chosen basis. When Alice and Bob choose the same basis the results
are perfectly correlated or anticorrelated depending on the entangled state. This
builds a shared cryptographic key.
Since the bases correspond to Bell angles, measurements on the state would violate
the CHSH inequality in support of no-hidden variables and therefore will exhibit nonlocal effects.
An eavesdropper who takes measurements on the entangled photon pair will destroy
all non-local correlations, hence Alice and Bob will know there is an eavesdropper by
a reduction in the number of violations to the CHSH inequality.

b) If both observers detect polarization there is a 50% chance they will both detect
vertically polarized photons as there is only two results; both vertical or both
horizontal.

c) Constructing the state in the new basis we have

|

(|

(|

| )

where we have
|

( |

| )

Putting this into | gives

(( (|

| )) ( (|

( ( |

(|

( |

(|

| ))

| )) ( ( |

| )))

NB: the state looks the same when orientated to 45o.

d) For this, we will use the subscripts + denoting vertical polarization and - denoting
horizontal polarization. We also use the notation of for the observer in the z-axis
and for the observer in the z-axis. Hence we are required to find the probabilities
i)

ii)

iii)

| |

|( (|

| | |

))|

| | |

Via orthonormality we have

| |

Also,
|

( |

|)

( |

|)

So
(

|( ( |

| |

|( (|

| |

| |

|( (|

| |

| |

| ) )|

))|

|( ( |

So our probabilities are

(
)
i)
ii)

))|

( ( |

|
(

| ))

| |

| ))

iii)

Question 18
a) For helium,
Hence the scaled Rydberg energy, ignoring the reduced mass is

The ground state energy is

The first excited state energy is

For photons we have

require

so for the frequency of the radiation absorbed we

Using
(

b) Fermions have a total antisymmetric wavefunction, for

the electron has an
antisymmetric spatial wavefunction and for
the electron has a symmetric
spatial wavefunction.
In a state described by a symmetric spatial wavefunction, two electrons huddle
together experiencing a strong positive potential energy from electron-electron
repulsion; this corresponds to the singlet state.
For an antisymmetrical spatial wavefunction, the two electrons are segregated and
experience a weaker positive potential energy from electron-electron repulsion; this
corresponds to the triplet state. Hence the repelling electrons lead to a lower energy
for the triplet term.

c) Self-consistency refers to the choice of a potential energy function that is

consistent with the distribution of electric charge obtained by solving the timeindependent Schrodinger equation for a given atom.
The central-field approximation replaces the repulsive electron-electron potential
energy functions by a sum of spherically symmetric effective potential energy
functions for individual electrons.
The Hamiltonian operator for the whole atom is hence the sum of the individual
spherically symmetric Hamiltonian operators.
The time-independent Schrodinger equation is separable, and its solutions can be
expressed as products of single-particle atomic orbitals, obtained by solving singleparticle time-independent Schrodinger equations for individual electrons.
Each atomic orbital is a product of a radial function and a spherical harmonic.
Three quantum numbers are

Any orbital with

More generally, this takes the form

where

is labeled as
.

d)

Where
|
|
So the (
(

|
|

|
|

|
|

) terms are
)(

)(

)(

)(

)(

or using spectroscopic notation

The highest LS is
We have

Using the (

) notation we have

)(

)(

Or using spectroscopic notation we have