subject
Physics, 04.03.2020 01:29 officialrogerfp3gf2s

The purpose of this problem is to compare the time dependencies for systems in a superposition of two energy eigenstates in an infinite square well to those in a simple harmonic oscillator. Consider two systems (an infinite square well and a simple harmonic oscillator) that have the same value for their ground state energy Eground. 1) What is Ez, the energy of the 2nd excited state (the third lowest energy) of the infinite square well system in terms of Eground? Ez = Eground Submit 2) What is E3, the energy of the 2nd excited state (the third lowest energy) of the simple harmonic oscillator system in terms of Eground? Ez = Eground Submit 3) Now suppose the wave function for the infinite square well system is a superposition of two energy eigenstates, namely its ground state and its second excited state. Assuming Eground = 20 eV, what is ty, the minimum time it takes for the probability density plx, t) of the infinite square well system to return to its original value (p(x,0)) at t0? t = s Submit 4) Now suppose the wave function for the simple harmonic oscillator system is a superposition of two energy eigenstates, namely its ground state and its second excited state. Assuming Eground = 20 eV, what is ty, the minimum time it takes for the probability density p(x, t1) of the simple harmonic oscillator system to return to its original value (p(x,0)) at t = 0?

ansver
Answers: 2

Another question on Physics

question
Physics, 21.06.2019 22:40
Which feature indicates that mars resides in the inner region of the solar system
Answers: 3
question
Physics, 21.06.2019 23:00
How are calculation for velocity and speed different
Answers: 1
question
Physics, 22.06.2019 02:30
Mass (kg) force (n) 5 25 10 50 15 75 20 100 a student was trying to find the relationship between mass and force. he placed four different masses on a table and pulled them using a spring scale. the table shows the different masses used in the experiment and the force required to pull each mass. the student concluded that more force was required to pull heavier objects. what comment would you make regarding his conclusion? a) no clear relation can be observed between mass and force from the data. b) there is a direct proportion between the mass and force listed in the table. c) gravity should have been taken into account while performing the experiment. d) there is an inverse proportion between the mass and force listed in the table.
Answers: 2
question
Physics, 22.06.2019 03:00
If it takes a planet 2.8 x 10^8 s to orbit a star with a mass of 6.2 x 10^30 kg what is the average distance between the planet and the star
Answers: 3
You know the right answer?
The purpose of this problem is to compare the time dependencies for systems in a superposition of tw...
Questions
Questions on the website: 13722367