PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics

Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.

Sam Morgan 2005

QUANTUM THEORY PHYS2B22

EVENING CLASS 2005
Lecturer Sam Morgan
• Office: A12
• Tel: (020) 7679 3486 (Internal: 33486)
• Email: [email protected]

Website
• http://www.tampa.phys.ucl.ac.uk/~sam/2B22.html
• Contains: Lecture notes, problem sets and past exam papers

Timetable: 11 sets of 3 hour lectures (with break!)

Mondays 6-9pm, Room A1,
Jan 10th to March 21st inclusive

Assessment: 90% on summer exam

10% on best 3 of 4 problem sheets
NB rules on exam withdrawals (Student Handbook p21)
NB 15% rule on coursework (Student Handbook p14-15)

TEXTBOOKS
Main texts

Alastair Rae Quantum Mechanics (IoP) (£12 -- closest to course)

Brehm and Mullin Introduction to the structure of matter (Wiley)
(£26 -- general purpose book)
Both available at a discount via the department

Also useful

Bransden and Joachain Quantum Mechanics (Prentice Hall)

(£29 -- also useful for more advanced courses)
R. Feynman Lectures on Physics III (Addison-Wesley)
(first 3 chapters give an excellent introduction to the main concepts)

1
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

SYLLABUS

1. The failure of classical mechanics

Photoelectric effect, Einstein’s equation, electron diffraction and de Broglie relation.
Compton scattering. Wave-particle duality, Uncertainty principle (Bohr microscope).
2. Steps towards wave mechanics
Time-dependent and time-independent Schrödinger equations. The wave function and its
interpretation.
3. One-dimensional time-independent problems
Infinite square well potential. Finite square well. Probability flux and the potential barrier
and step. Reflection and transmission. Tunnelling and examples in physics and astronomy.
Wavepackets. The simple harmonic oscillator.
4. The formal basis of quantum mechanics
The postulates of quantum mechanics – operators, observables, eigenvalues and
eigenfunctions. Hermitian operators and the Expansion Postulate.
5. Angular momentum in quantum mechanics
Operators, eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of Lˆz and Lˆ .
2

SYLLABUS (cont)

6. The hydrogen atom

Separation of space and time parts of the 3D Schrödinger equation for a central field. The
radial Schrödinger equation and its solution by series method. Degeneracy and spectroscopic
notation.
7. Electron spin and total angular momentum
Magnetic moment of electron due to orbital motion. The Stern-Gerlach experiment. Electron
spin and complete set of quantum numbers for the hydrogen atom. Rules for addition of
angular momentum quantum numbers. Total spin and orbital angular momentum quantum
numbers S, L, J. Construct J from S and L.

2
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

E = hν
Photo-electric effect, Compton Davisson-Germer experiment,
scattering double-slit experiment
h
p=
Particle nature of light in λ Wave nature of matter in
quantum mechanics quantum mechanics

Wave-particle duality

Postulates:
Time-dependent Schrödinger
equation, Born interpretation Operators,eigenvalues and
2246 Maths Separation of eigenfunctions, expansions
Methods III variables in complete sets,
Time-independent Schrödinger commutators, expectation
Frobenius equation values, time evolution
method
Quantum simple Legendre
harmonic oscillator Hydrogenic atom 1D problems equation 2246
En = (n + 12 ) ω0
Angular momentum
operators
Radial solution Angular solution
Lˆz , Lˆ2
1 Z2 Yl m (θ , φ )
Rnl , E = −
2 n2 5

WAVE PARTICLE DUALITY

Evidence for wave-particle duality

• Photoelectric effect
• Compton effect

• Electron diffraction
• Interference of matter-waves

Consequence: Heisenberg uncertainty principle

3
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

Hertz J.J. Thomson

PHOTOELECTRIC EFFECT
When UV light is shone on a metal plate in a vacuum, it emits
charged particles (Hertz 1887), which were later shown to be
electrons by J.J. Thomson (1899).

Vacuum Light, frequency ν

Classical expectations
chamber
Collecting Electric field E of light exerts force
Metal
plate F=-eE on electrons. As intensity of
plate
light increases, force increases, so KE
of ejected electrons should increase.
Electrons should be emitted whatever
the frequency ν of the light, so long as
I E is sufficiently large

Ammeter For very low intensities, expect a time

lag between light exposure and emission,
Potentiostat
while electrons absorb enough energy to
escape from material

Einstein
PHOTOELECTRIC EFFECT (cont)
Actual results: Einstein’s
interpretation (1905):
Maximum KE of ejected electrons is
independent of intensity, but Light comes in packets
dependent on ν of energy (photons)
For ν<ν0 (i.e. for frequencies Millikan
below a cut-off frequency) no E = hν
electrons are emitted
An electron absorbs a
There is no time lag. However, single photon to leave
rate of ejection of electrons the material
depends on light intensity.

The maximum KE of an emitted electron is then

K max = hν − W
Work function: minimum Verified in detail
Planck constant: through subsequent
energy needed for electron to
universal constant of experiments by
escape from metal (depends on
nature Millikan
material, but usually 2-5eV)
h = 6.63 ×10−34 Js

4
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

Photoemission experiments today

Modern successor to original photoelectric

effect experiments is ARPES (Angle-
Resolved Photoemission Spectroscopy)

February 2000

Emitted electrons give information on

distribution of electrons within a material
as a function of energy and momentum

SUMMARY OF PHOTON PROPERTIES

Relation between particle and wave properties of light

Energy and frequency E = hν
Also have relation between momentum and wavelength
Relativistic formula relating
energy and momentum
E 2 = p 2c 2 + m2c 4
For light E = pc and c = λν
h hν
p= =
λ c
Also commonly write these as wavevector
2π h
E= ω p= k ω = 2πν k= =
angular frequency λ hbar 2π

5
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

Compton
COMPTON SCATTERING
Compton (1923) measured intensity of scattered X-rays from
solid target, as function of wavelength for different angles.
He won the 1927 Nobel prize.

X-ray source
Collimator Crystal
(selects angle) (selects
wavelength)

θ
Target

Detector
Result: peak in scattered radiation
shifts to longer wavelength than source.
Amount depends on θ (but not on the
target material). A.H. Compton, Phys. Rev. 22 409 (1923)

COMPTON SCATTERING (cont)

Classical picture: oscillating electromagnetic field causes oscillations in positions of
charged particles, which re-radiate in all directions at same frequency and wavelength as
incident radiation.
Change in wavelength of scattered light is completely unexpected classically

Incident light wave Oscillating electron Emitted light wave

Compton’s explanation: “billiard ball” collisions between particles of

light (X-ray photons) and electrons in the material

Before After pν ′
scattered photon
Incoming photon
θ
pν
Electron
pe scattered electron

6
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

COMPTON SCATTERING (cont)

Before After pν ′
scattered photon
Incoming photon
θ
pν
Electron
pe scattered electron

Conservation of energy Conservation of momentum

h
hν + me c 2 = hν ′ + ( pe2 c 2 + m c )
2 4 1/ 2
pν = ˆi = pν ′ + p e
λ
e

From this Compton derived the change in wavelength

h
λ′ − λ = (1 − cosθ )
me c
= λc (1 − cosθ ) ≥ 0
h
λc = Compton wavelength = = 2.4 × 10−12 m
me c

COMPTON SCATTERING
(cont)

Note that, at all angles

there is also an unshifted peak.

This comes from a collision between

the X-ray photon and the nucleus of
the atom
h
λ′ − λ = (1 − cos θ ) ∼ 0
mN c

since mN me

7
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY OF LIGHT

In 1924 Einstein wrote:- “ There are therefore now two
theories of light, both indispensable, and … without any
logical connection.”

Evidence for wave-nature of light

• Diffraction and interference
Evidence for particle-nature of light
• Photoelectric effect
• Compton effect
•Light exhibits diffraction and interference phenomena that
are only explicable in terms of wave properties
•Light is always detected as packets (photons); if we look,
we never observe half a photon
•Number of photons proportional to energy density (i.e. to
square of electromagnetic field strength)

De Broglie

MATTER WAVES
We have seen that light comes in discrete units (photons) with
particle properties (energy and momentum) that are related to the
wave-like properties of frequency and wavelength.

In 1923 Prince Louis de Broglie postulated that ordinary matter can have
wave-like properties, with the wavelength λ related to momentum
p in the same way as for light

de Broglie relation h
λ= Planck’s constant
h = 6.63 × 10−34 Js
de Broglie wavelength
p
NB wavelength depends on momentum, not on the physical size of the particle

Prediction: We should see diffraction and interference of matter waves

8
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

Estimate some de Broglie wavelengths

• Wavelength of electron with 50eV kinetic energy
p2 h2 h
K= = ⇒λ = = 1.7 × 10−10 m
2me 2me λ 2
2me K

• Wavelength of Nitrogen molecule at room temperature

3kT
K= , Mass = 28m u
2
h
λ= = 2.8 × 10−11 m
3MkT

• Wavelength of Rubidium(87) atom at 50nK

h
λ= = 1.2 × 10−6 m
3MkT

ELECTRON DIFFRACTION
The Davisson-Germer experiment (1927)
The Davisson-Germer experiment: Davisson G.P. Thomson
θi scattering a beam of electrons from
a Ni crystal. Davisson got the 1937
Nobel prize.
θi

At fixed angle, find sharp peaks in

intensity as a function of electron energy

Davisson, C. J.,
At fixed accelerating voltage (fixed "Are Electrons
electron energy) find a pattern of sharp Waves?," Franklin
reflected beams from the crystal Institute Journal
205, 597 (1928)

G.P. Thomson performed similar interference

experiments with thin-film samples

9
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

ELECTRON DIFFRACTION (cont)

Interpretation: similar to Bragg scattering of X-rays from crystals

θi Path difference:
a cos θi
a (cos θ r − cos θi )
θr
Constructive interference when
a
a (cos θ r − cos θi ) = nλ

Electron scattering
dominated by surface
layers a cos θr Note difference from usual “Bragg’s Law”
geometry: the identical scattering planes are
Note θi and θr not oriented perpendicular to the surface
necessarily equal

THE DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT

Originally performed by Young (1801) to demonstrate the wave-nature of light.
Has now been done with electrons, neutrons, He atoms among others.

Alternative
method of
y detection: scan a
detector across
the plane and
d
θ record number of
arrivals at each
Incoming coherent d sin θ point
beam of particles
(or light) Detecting
screen
D

For particles we expect two peaks, for waves an interference pattern

10
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Neutrons, A Zeilinger
et al. 1988 Reviews of
Modern Physics 60
1067-1073

He atoms: O Carnal and J Mlynek

1991 Physical Review Letters 66
2689-2692

C60 molecules: M Fringe

Arndt et al. 1999 visibility
Nature 401 680- decreases as
682 molecules are
With heated. L.
multiple-slit Hackermüller
grating et al. 2004
Nature 427
Without grating 711-714

Interference patterns can not be explained classically - clear demonstration of matter waves

DOUBLE-
DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT WITH HELIUM ATOMS
(Carnal & Mlynek,
Mlynek, 1991,Phys.Rev.Lett.,66,p2689)

Path difference: d sin θ

Constructive interference: d sin θ = nλ
λD y
Separation between maxima: ∆y =
(proof following) d
Experiment: He atoms at 83K, with d
d=8µm and D=64cm θ
d sin θ
Measured separation: ∆y = 8.2 µ m

Predicted de Broglie wavelength:

D
3kT
K= , Mass = 4m u
2
h Predicted separation: ∆y = 8.4 ± 0.8µ m
λ= = 1.03 × 10−10 m
3MkT Good agreement with experiment

11
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

FRINGE SPACING IN
DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT
Maxima when: d sin θ = nλ
D d so use small angle approximation
nλ
θ≈ y
d
λ
⇒ ∆θ ≈ d
d θ

d sin θ
Position on screen: y = D tan θ ≈ Dθ

So separation between adjacent maxima:

D
∆y ≈ D∆θ
λD
⇒ ∆y =
d

DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT
INTERPRETATION
• The flux of particles arriving at the slits can be reduced so that only one
particle arrives at a time. Interference fringes are still observed!
Wave-behaviour can be shown by a single atom.
Each particle goes through both slits at once.
A matter wave can interfere with itself.
Hence matter-waves are distinct from H2O molecules collectively
giving rise to water waves.
• Wavelength of matter wave unconnected to any internal size of particle.
Instead it is determined by the momentum.
• If we try to find out which slit the particle goes through the interference
pattern vanishes!
We cannot see the wave/particle nature at the same time.
If we know which path the particle takes, we lose the fringes .

The importance of the two-slit experiment has been memorably summarized

by Richard Feynman: “…a phenomenon which is impossible, absolutely impossible,
to explain in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics.
In reality it contains the only mystery.”

12
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Some key papers in the development of the double-slit experiment during the 20th century:

•Performed with a light source so faint that only one photon exists in the apparatus at any one time
G I Taylor 1909 Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 15 114-115
•Performed with electrons
C Jönsson 1961 Zeitschrift für Physik 161 454-474,
(translated 1974 American Journal of Physics 42 4-11)
•Performed with single electrons
A Tonomura et al. 1989 American Journal of Physics 57 117-120
•Performed with neutrons
A Zeilinger et al. 1988 Reviews of Modern Physics 60 1067-1073
•Performed with He atoms
O Carnal and J Mlynek 1991 Physical Review Letters 66 2689-2692
•Performed with C60 molecules
M Arndt et al. 1999 Nature 401 680-682
•Performed with C70 molecules showing reduction in fringe visibility as temperature rises
and the molecules “give away” their position by emitting photons
L. Hackermüller et al 2004 Nature 427 711-714
•Performed with Na Bose-Einstein Condensates
M R Andrews et al. 1997 Science 275 637-641
An excellent summary is available in Physics World (September 2002 issue, page 15)
and at http://physicsweb.org/ (readers voted the double-slit experiment “the most beautiful in physics”).

HEISENBERG MICROSCOPE AND

THE UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE
(also called the Bohr microscope, but the thought
experiment is mainly due to Heisenberg).
The microscope is an imaginary device to measure
the position (y) and momentum (p) of a particle.

Heisenberg

Particle
θ/2
∆y
Light source,
wavelength λ
Resolving power of lens:
Lens, with angular
diameter θ λ
∆y ≥
θ

13
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

HEISENBERG MICROSCOPE (cont)

Photons transfer momentum to the particle when they scatter.
Magnitude of p is the same before and after the collision. Why?
p
Uncertainty in photon y-momentum
= Uncertainty in particle y-momentum
θ/2
− p sin (θ / 2 ) ≤ p y ≤ p sin (θ / 2 )
p
Small angle approximation
∆p y = 2 p sin (θ / 2 ) ≈ pθ
hθ
de Broglie relation gives p = h / λ and so ∆p y ≈
λ
λ
From before ∆y ≥ hence ∆p y ∆y ≈ h
θ
HEISENBERG UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE.

Point for discussion

The thought experiment seems to imply that, while prior to
experiment we have well defined values, it is the act of
measurement which introduces the uncertainty by
disturbing the particle’s position and momentum.

Nowadays it is more widely accepted that quantum

uncertainty (lack of determinism) is intrinsic to the theory.

14
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

HEISENBERG UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE

We will show formally (section 4)

∆x∆px ≥ / 2
∆y∆p y ≥ / 2
∆z∆pz ≥ / 2
HEISENBERG UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE.

We cannot have simultaneous knowledge

of ‘conjugate’ variables such as position and momenta.

Note, however, ∆x∆p y ≥ 0 etc

Arbitary precision is possible in principle for

position in one direction and momentum in another

HEISENBERG UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE

There is also an energy-time uncertainty relation

∆E∆t ≥ / 2
Transitions between energy levels of atoms are not perfectly
sharp in frequency.
n=3 An electron in n = 3 will spontaneously
E = hν 32 decay to a lower level after a lifetime
n=2
of order t ∼ 10 −8 s

n=1
Intensity

There is a corresponding ‘spread’ in

∆ν 32
the emitted frequency

ν 32 Frequency

15
 PHYS2B22 Quantum Physics
Evening course lecture notes. Set 1.
Sam Morgan 2005

CONCLUSIONS
Light and matter exhibit wave-
wave-particle duality

Relation between wave and particle properties h

given by the de Broglie relations E = hν p=
λ
, light
Evidence for particle properties of
Photoelectric effect, Compton scattering

Evidence for wave properties of matter

Electron diffraction, interference of matter waves
(electrons, neutrons, He atoms, C60 molecules)
∆x∆px ≥ / 2
Heisenberg uncertainty principle limits ∆y∆p y ≥ / 2
simultaneous knowledge of conjugate variables
∆z∆pz ≥ / 2

16