cross-posting to sci.engr.mech
> Not sure if this is the best n.g for this question
>
> I've got a funny-shaped potential barrier, and need to use matrix
> transfer method (WKB no use here, need to see any resonance)
>
> I can follow the theory O.K, but tending to get stuck on
> idiot stuff, like what do I choose for A,B C,D constants
> in wave equations.
> Anyone reccomend an idiots guide? Or a more suitable n.g?
>
> Steve Ralph
>
>
"N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" wrote in message news:itvbd.898$SW3.490@fed1read01...
Yes, the ends have to join up, no problems there-
I have equations of the type
phi1(x) = Ae^ik1x + Be^-ik1x (x
The 'open ended' ranges are one key here: To be integrable, the functions cannot grow without limit as one moves out into the open range. This constrains both B and E to identically zero.
Another 'trick' is node counting: a node is a point where the wave function vanishes. If C and D are of the same sign, there can be no node in the interval 0
Speaking of nodes, the document I'm working from is
SR
Thanx again. I graduated in physics in '76, and then got my doc in turbulent combustion flow measurement. I had to struggle to get an equation in there at all :>)) It is something of a shock to find myself with my trusty PC doing QM! It is like banging the rust off pipes. All of a sudden the math sort of came into focus, (comments from Tadchem and N:dlx wotsit helped ) so feeling a lot more competent (until the next obstacle) its down to ordinary programming and countering my tendancy to make dumb mistakes now. I just hope I can put E = Vmax and get 1, and E=Vmax=0 and get 0. (fat chance :>))
This is real fun. As an experimentalist I never expected to get involved in theoretical work, let alone get to see new territory. (Provided I can get my arithmetic right of course LOL)
Steve Ralph
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required