Chapter II

Wavelike Properties of Particles

DE BROGLIE’S HYPOTHESIS

Considering light as a wave, a photon of light of frequency 𝜈 has energy

𝐸 = ℎ𝜈
Whereas considering the particle behaviour of photon, the energy is given by
𝐸 = 𝑝𝑐
Equating the above two equations, ℎ𝜈 = 𝑝𝑐
∴ the momentum
ℎ𝜈 ℎ
𝑝= = [𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑐 = 𝜈𝜆]
𝑐 𝜆
The wavelength of a photon in terms of momentum is therefore
ℎ
𝜆=
𝑝
De Broglie suggested that this equation is a completely general one that applies to particles as well as to
photons. Hence, associated with any material particle moving with momentum p there is a wave of
wavelength λ given by
ℎ
𝜆=
𝑝
where h is Planck’s constant. The wavelength λ is called its de Broglie wavelength. The waves associated
with particles are called De Broglie waves or matter waves.
Based on the data given, de Broglie wavelength can be calculated as follows:

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]

Note that, because of the smallness of h, the wave behaviour will be observable only for particles of
atomic or nuclear size. Also, there is no experiment that can be done to reveal the wave nature of
macroscopic (laboratory-sized) objects.

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]

Experimental Evidence for De Broglie Waves
The wave behaviour can be proved using interference and diffraction experiments. But the
experimental difficulties of constructing double slits to do interference experiments with beams of
atomic or subatomic particles were not solved until long after the time of de Broglie’s hypothesis.

Particle Diffraction Experiments

Diffraction is the encroachment of light into the geometrical shadow. Diffraction of light waves
is illustrated in Figure below. It shows the light diffracted by a single slit. For light of wavelength λ
incident on a slit of width a, the diffraction minima are located at angles given by
a sin 𝜃 = n λ n = 1, 2, 3…
Here a is the slit width, n is order of diffraction. Note that most of the light intensity falls in the
central maximum.

The experiments that first verified de Broglie’s hypothesis is electron diffraction. It was not done
through a single slit as above, but instead through the atoms of a crystal. The outcomes of these
experiments are similar to those of the X-ray diffraction experiments discussed in chapter one.
In an electron diffraction experiment, a beam of electrons is accelerated from rest through a
potential difference ΔV, acquiring a nonrelativistic kinetic energy K = e ΔV and a momentum p =
√2mK. Wave mechanics would describe the beam of electrons as a wave of wavelength λ = h/p. The
beam strikes a crystal, and the scattered beam is photographed. The similarity between electron
diffraction patterns and X-ray diffraction patterns strongly suggests that the electrons are behaving as
waves.
An electron diffraction experiment gave the first experimental confirmation of the wave nature
of electrons soon after de Broglie’s original hypothesis. In 1926 Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer
were investigating the reflection of electron beams from the surface of nickel crystals. A schematic view
of their apparatus is shown in the first figure below.
A beam of electrons from a heated filament is accelerated through a potential difference ΔV.
After passing through a small aperture, the beam strikes a single crystal of nickel. Electrons are scattered
in all directions by the atoms of the crystal, some of them striking a detector, which can be moved to
any angle 𝜙 relative to the incident beam and which measures the intensity of the electron beam scattered
at that angle.

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]

 The second Figure shows the results of one of the experiments of Davisson and Germer. When
the accelerating voltage is set at 54V, there is an intense reflection of the beam at the angle 𝜙 = 500 .
Let’s see how these results give confirmation of the de Broglie wavelength.
Each of the atoms of the crystal can act as a scatterer, so the scattered electron waves can
interfere. Figure below shows a simplified representation of the nickel crystal used in the Davisson–
Germer experiment.

The diffraction takes place in the plane of atoms on the surface. The situation is entirely similar
to using a reflection-type diffraction grating for light; the spacing d between the rows of atoms on the
crystal is analogous to the spacing between the slits in the optical grating. The maxima for a diffraction
grating occur at angles 𝜙 such that the path difference between adjacent rays d sin 𝜙 is equal to a whole
number of wavelengths:
d sin 𝜙 = n λ n = 1, 2, 3…
From experimental data, it is known that the spacing between the rows of atoms in a nickel crystal
is d = 0.215 nm. Taking n = 1, the corresponding wavelength is,
λ = d sin 𝜙 = 0.215 nm x sin 500 = 0.165 nm
We can compare this value with that of the de Broglie theory. An electron accelerated through a
potential difference of 54V has a kinetic energy of 54 eV and therefore a momentum of

This is in excellent agreement with the value found from the diffraction maximum and provides
strong evidence in favour of the de Broglie theory. For this experimental work, Davisson shared the
1937 Nobel Prize with G. P. Thomson.

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]

Double-Slit Experiments with Particles
The confirmation for the wave nature of light was obtained from the double-slit experiment performed
by Thomas Young in 1801. In principle, it should be possible to do double-slit experiments with particles
and thereby directly observe their wavelike behaviour.
The first double-slit experiment with electrons was done in 1961. A diagram of the apparatus is shown
in Figure.

The electrons from a hot filament were accelerated through 50 kV (corresponding to λ = 5.4 pm) and
then passed through a double slit of separation 2.0 𝜇m and width 0.5 𝜇m.

Uncertainty Relationships for Classical Waves

1. Position-Momentum Uncertainty Relationship for Classical Waves
The amplitude of a wave tells us the location of the particle. Clearly a pure sinusoidal wave, as
in Figure (a), is not much use in locating a particle because the wave extends from −∞to +∞, so the
particle might be found anywhere in that region (position is not precisely known). On the other hand, a
narrow wave pulse like Figure (b) does a pretty good job of locating the particle in a small region of
space, but for this wave the wavelength is not precisely known, and hence momentum is not precisely
ℎ
known (since 𝜆 = 𝑝 )

In the first case, we know the momentum exactly but have no knowledge of the location of the particle,
while in the second case we have a good idea of the location of the particle but a poor knowledge of its
momentum. This is the essence of uncertainty principle.
Now, let us examine this competition between specifying the location and the momentum of
classical waves more closely. Figure (a) below shows a very small wave packet. The disturbance is well
localized to a small region of space of length Δx, i.e., position is precise.

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]

Let’s try to measure the wavelength of this wave packet. Placing a scale along the wave, we have some
difficulty in telling exactly where the wave starts and where it ends. Our measurement of the wavelength
is therefore subject to a small uncertainty Δλ. Let’s represent this uncertainty as
Δλ ∼ 𝜀λ
Where 𝜀 is a number much less than one. [value lies between 0.01 and 1]
Since the size of this wave disturbance is roughly one wavelength we can write,
Δx ∼ λ ------(2)
Eqn. (1) x (2)
𝚫𝒙. 𝚫𝛌 ~𝛆𝝀𝟐
1
∴ Δ𝑥 ∝
∆𝜆
This is a fundamental property of classical waves, independent of the type of wave or the method used
to measure its wavelength. This is the position-momentum uncertainty relationship for classical waves.
For a given wavelength, the smaller the size of the wave packet, the greater the uncertainty in our
knowledge of the wavelength.
Example

2. The Frequency–Time Uncertainty Relationship for Classical Waves

Now we are measuring the period of the wave that comprises our wave packet. Suppose we have a timer
to measure the duration of the wave packet, as in Figure below.

The duration of this wave packet is roughly one period, T.

𝑖. 𝑒. Δt ≈ T -----(1)
Whatever measuring device we use, we have some difficulty locating exactly the start and end of one
cycle, so we have an uncertainty ΔT in measuring the period. We’ll assume this uncertainty is some
small fraction of the period:
𝑖. 𝑒. ΔT ∼ 𝜀T ------(2)
Eqn. (1) x (2)
Δ𝑡. Δ𝑇~𝜀𝑇 2
We have to write the above equation in terms of frequency instead of time period.
1
𝑓=
𝑇
1
𝑆𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 d𝑓 = − 2 𝑑𝑇
𝑇
1
𝑜𝑟 Δ𝑓 = 𝑇 2 Δ𝑇 [ignore negative sign]
𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒, Δ𝑇 = 𝑇 2 . Δ𝑓
Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]
 ∴ Δ𝑡. Δ𝑇~𝜀𝑇 2 𝑏𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑠
Δ𝑡. 𝑇 2 . Δ𝑓~𝜀𝑇 2
𝑜𝑟 𝚫𝒕. 𝚫𝒇~𝜺

This is the Frequency-Time uncertainty relationship for classical waves. The longer the duration of the
wave packet, the more precisely we can measure its frequency.
Example
An electronics salesman offers to sell you a frequency-measuring device. When hooked up to a
sinusoidal signal, it automatically displays the frequency of the signal, and to account for frequency
variations, the frequency is remeasured once each second and the display is updated. The salesman
claims the device to be accurate to 0.01 Hz. Is this claim valid?
Answer: Estimating 𝜀 to be about 0.1, we know that a measurement of frequency in a time Δt = 1s must
have an associated uncertainty of about

So, this claim is invalid.

Heisenberg Uncertainty Relationships [in Quantum Mechanics]

To regard a moving particle as a wave group implies that there are fundamental limits to the
accuracy with which we can measure such “particle” properties as position and momentum.

Let us look at the wave group in Figure (a) above. The particle that corresponds to this wave
group may be located anywhere within the group at a given time. The probability density is a maximum
in the middle of the group, so it is most likely to be found there. However, we may still find the particle
anywhere within the group.
The narrower its wave group [fig. (b)], the more precisely a particle’s position can be specified.
However, the wavelength of the waves in a narrow packet is not well defined; there are not enough
h
waves to measure λ accurately. This means that the particle’s momentum λ = p , is not a precise quantity.
On the other hand, a wide wave group [Fig.(c)], has a clearly defined wavelength. The
momentum that corresponds to this wavelength is therefore a precise quantity. But where is the particle
located? The width of the group is now too great for us to be able to say exactly where the particle is at
a given time. Thus, “It is impossible to determine both the exact position and exact momentum of an
object at the same time.”
The uncertainty principle can be derived by considering the particle properties of waves as well
as by considering the wave properties of particles. In order to measure the position and momentum of
an object at a certain moment, we must touch it with something that will carry the required information
back to us
Suppose we look at an electron using light of wavelength λ, as in Figure below.

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]

 ℎ
Each photon of this light has the momentum 𝑝 = λ . When one of these photons bounces off the
electron, the electron’s original momentum will be changed by an amount ∆𝑝. This change will be of
the order of
ℎ
∆𝑝 ≈
λ
The longer the wavelength of the observing photon, the smaller the uncertainty in the electron’s
momentum.
Because light is a wave phenomenon as well as a particle phenomenon, we cannot expect to
determine the electron’s location with perfect accuracy regardless of the instrument used. A reasonable
estimate of the minimum uncertainty in the measurement might be one photon wavelength, so that
∆𝑥 ≥ 𝜆
The shorter the wavelength, the smaller the uncertainty in location. However, if we use light of
short wavelength to increase the accuracy of the position measurement, there will be a corresponding
decrease in the accuracy of the momentum measurement because the higher photon momentum will
disturb the electron’s motion to a greater extent. Light of long wavelength will give a more accurate
momentum but a less accurate position.
Multiplying the above two equations gives us the uncertainty relation:
∆𝑥. ∆𝑝 ≥ ℎ
In practice the equation for uncertainty principle is given by:
ℏ
∆𝑥. ∆𝑝 ≥
2
Where ℏ is called reduced Planck ′ sconstant.
ℎ 6.626 x 10−34
ℏ= = = 1.05 x 10−34 𝐽. 𝑠
2𝜋 2 x 3.14

Energy-Time Uncertainty
It is impossible to determine both the energy and the time coordinate of a particle simultaneously.
ℏ
∆𝐸. ∆𝑡 ≥
2

Example

Q) Show that an electron cannot stay inside an atomic nucleus. [Nuclear radius = 5 x 10−15 𝑚]

Let us imagine that the electron is inside the nucleus. We can calculate the minimum energy of
such an electron. Suppose we measure the position of this electron inside the nucleus with maximum
uncertainty: i.e., ∆𝑥𝑚𝑎𝑥 = radius of the nucleus = 5 x 10−15 𝑚
Then the corresponding momentum will be minimum.
ℏ
∴ ∆𝑥𝑚𝑎𝑥 . ∆𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 =
2

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]

 ℏ 1.05 x 10−34 1.05 x 10−34
or 𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 = = 𝑗 = = 1.05x10−20
2x∆𝑥𝑚𝑎𝑥 2x5 x 10−15 2x5 x 10−15
∴ the minimum energy of the electron,
1
𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 𝑝𝑐 = 1.05x10−20 x3x108 𝐽 = 1.05x10−20 x3x108 x 𝑒𝑉 = 19.6𝑀𝑒𝑉
1.6x10−19
Experiments show that the electrons emitted by certain unstable nuclei have very much less energy
compared to this energy, from which we conclude that nuclei cannot contain electrons.

Question

Question

A Statistical Interpretation of Uncertainty

Whenever we have many readings for a physical quantity, we use the root mean square deviation,
which is the uncertainty in the measurement of that quantity.
Suppose we measure the momentum of a particle as 𝑝1 , 𝑝2 , 𝑝3 … 𝑝𝑛 . Then their mean is
𝑝1 + 𝑝2 + 𝑝3 + ⋯ 𝑝𝑛
〈𝑝〉 =
𝑛
Each value of momentum has a deviation from the average value, which is called deviation, and is given
by
d = p − 〈p〉
∴ the square of deviation, d2 = ( p − 〈p〉)2
2 2 2
or d = p − 2p〈p〉 + 〈p〉
∴ the mean of square of deviation is 〈d2 〉 = 〈p2 − 2p〈p〉 + 〈p〉2 〉
or 〈d2 〉 = 〈p2 〉 − 2〈p〉〈p〉 + 〈p〉2

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]

or 〈d2 〉 = 〈p2 〉 − 2〈p〉2 + 〈p〉2
or 〈d2 〉 = 〈p2 〉 − 〈p〉2
∴the uncertainty, which is the root of mean of square of deviation (or simply root mean square)
is given by
∆𝑝 = √〈d2 〉 = √〈p2 〉 − 〈p〉2

What are actually matter waves?

In water waves, the quantity that varies periodically is the height of the water surface. In sound
waves, it is pressure. In light waves, electric and magnetic fields vary. What is it that varies in the case
of matter waves?
The quantity whose variations make up matter waves is called the wave function, represented by
the symbol ψ (the Greek letter psi). The value of the wave function associated with a moving body at
the particular point x, y, z in space at the time t is related to the probability of finding the body there at
the time.
The wave function ψ itself, however, has no direct physical significance. There is a simple reason
for this. The probability that something be in a certain place at a given time must lie between 0 (the
object is definitely not there) and 1 (the object is definitely there). An intermediate probability, say 0.2,
means that there is a 20% chance of finding the object. But the amplitude of a wave can be negative as
well as positive, and a negative probability, say 0.2, is meaningless. Hence ψ by itself cannot be an
observable quantity. This objection does not apply to|ψ|2, the square of the absolute value of the wave
function, which is known as probability density:
The probability of experimentally finding the body described by the wave function at the point
x, y, z, at the time t is proportional to the value of |ψ|2, there at t.

Wave Packets, Phase Velocity and Group Velocity

The de Broglie wave associated with a material particle is actually many individual waves called
phase waves (Since they all have the same phase). The phase waves travel with a velocity called phase
velocity, V𝑝 . The phase waves combine to form a group wave. The velocity of this group of waves is
called group velocity, V𝑔 .
Hence, we call the de Broglie wave velocity as V𝑝 . To find V𝑝 , we can apply the usual formula,
V𝑝 = νλ
ℎ 𝑚𝑐 2
Substituting, 𝜆 = 𝑚𝑣 and 𝜈 = , we get
ℎ
ℎ 𝑚𝑐 2 𝑐2
V𝑝 = 𝑚𝑣 x ℎ = 𝑣
Because the particle velocity V must be less than the velocity of light c, the de Broglie waves
always travel faster than light! Thus, phase velocity has no physical significance. We can understand
this unexpected result in the following way:

Though the phase waves have velocity greater than light, these individual waves combine to form group
wave, which is same as the velocity of the particle. Thus, the individual waves undergo constructive
interference at the place where the particle is present and undergoes destructive interference where the
particle is absent.
Phase velocity is calculated using the formula:
𝜔
V𝑝 =
𝑘
Group velocity is calculated using the formula:
Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]
 𝑑𝜔
V𝑔 =
𝑑𝑘
In terms of energy and momentum:
Phase velocity is calculated using the formula:
𝜔 ℏ𝜔 𝐸
V𝑝 = = =
𝑘 ℏ𝑘 𝑝
Group velocity is calculated using the formula:
𝑑𝜔 𝑑(ℏ𝜔) 𝑑𝐸
V𝑔 = = =
𝑑𝑘 𝑑(ℏ𝑘) 𝑑𝑝

Example

Q] Prove that group velocity is same as the velocity of the particle.

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]
Note that, in terms of E and p:
𝑝2
Energy of the particle, 𝐸 = 2𝑚
dE 2p
∴ group velocity = = = v = velocity of the particle
dp 2m

Notes By Saleem M.A [https://www.youtube.com/c/a2zMedias]