Why doesn't the particle in a ring model have a potential energy term?












3












$begingroup$


I was thinking of the "particle on a ring" problem as a subdivision of a bigger problem, i.e. the hydrogen atom. While in the hydrogen atom problem, the Hamiltonian contains a potential energy term, the Hamiltonian in the "particle on a ring" problem does not.



Why is it so? What are its implications in the mathematical solution to the problems?










share|improve this question









New contributor




prakash_amod is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$

















    3












    $begingroup$


    I was thinking of the "particle on a ring" problem as a subdivision of a bigger problem, i.e. the hydrogen atom. While in the hydrogen atom problem, the Hamiltonian contains a potential energy term, the Hamiltonian in the "particle on a ring" problem does not.



    Why is it so? What are its implications in the mathematical solution to the problems?










    share|improve this question









    New contributor




    prakash_amod is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.







    $endgroup$















      3












      3








      3





      $begingroup$


      I was thinking of the "particle on a ring" problem as a subdivision of a bigger problem, i.e. the hydrogen atom. While in the hydrogen atom problem, the Hamiltonian contains a potential energy term, the Hamiltonian in the "particle on a ring" problem does not.



      Why is it so? What are its implications in the mathematical solution to the problems?










      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      prakash_amod is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.







      $endgroup$




      I was thinking of the "particle on a ring" problem as a subdivision of a bigger problem, i.e. the hydrogen atom. While in the hydrogen atom problem, the Hamiltonian contains a potential energy term, the Hamiltonian in the "particle on a ring" problem does not.



      Why is it so? What are its implications in the mathematical solution to the problems?







      physical-chemistry quantum-chemistry






      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      prakash_amod is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      prakash_amod is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 7 hours ago









      orthocresol

      39k7113237




      39k7113237






      New contributor




      prakash_amod is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 7 hours ago









      prakash_amodprakash_amod

      161




      161




      New contributor




      prakash_amod is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      prakash_amod is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      prakash_amod is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4












          $begingroup$

          The short answer is that the particle in a ring is defined to have no potential energy term. Once you introduce something else into the system, then it is no longer really the particle on a ring problem any more.



          However, if you want to relate it to the hydrogen atom, then note that in the hydrogen atom, the Coulomb potential is a function of only $r$, i.e.



          $$V(r) = -frac{1}{r}$$



          in atomic units. In the particle on a ring model system, the particle is already constrained to be at a particular value of $r$, so even if we were to hypothetically introduce a Coulomb-type potential $propto 1/r$, this would just be a constant. The effect of having a constant potential energy is just to shift every eigenstate up in energy by the same amount; it has no real physical effect.



          What are the differences in the mathematical solutions? Well, you already know it, surely; the eigenstates of the hydrogen atom are atomic orbitals, whereas the eigenstates of the particle on a ring are simply $exp(mathrm imphi)$ with $m in mathbb{Z}$ to satisfy the boundary condition.



          Of course, this $exp(mathrm imphi)$ term is indeed part of the mathematical form of the atomic orbitals. This is because when you solve the Schrödinger equation for the hydrogen atom, you can successively separate out different degrees of freedom. Firstly you separate the bit which depends on $r$, which goes on to become the radial wavefunction $R(r)$. Then you need to solve for the angular wavefunction $Y(theta,phi)$, and the way of doing this is to again use separation of variables, i.e. assume $Y(theta,phi) = f(theta)g(phi)$. That gets you to a differential equation which looks like $(-1/g)(mathrm d^2g/mathrm d phi^2) = m^2$, which has $g = exp(mathrm imphi)$ as its solutions. I'm glossing over some details here, but that's the general idea; consult e.g. Griffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics for the nitty-gritty bits.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$





















            3












            $begingroup$

            There is a potential energy of some sorts: The potential energy is constant within the ring, and infinitely high outside of it. This is an idealized situation similar to the particle in a box (one-dimensional, two-dimensional, three-dimensional).



            Even though these models are artificial and ideal, they can be used to estimate properties of certain sets of molecules. For example, you can discuss the spectra of molecules with linear conjugated double bonds using the model of the one-dimensional particle in the box.



            When setting up the Hamiltonian, you implicitly introduced a infinitely high potential by boundary conditions and choice of coordinate systems. The free electron would move in three dimensions. For the one-dimensional particle in the box, the choice of just one coordinate constrains the electron to one dimension, and the boundary conditions of an electron density of zero at the edges of the box constrains the electron to a certain length of box. For the particle in a ring, you can choose a cylindrical coordinate system, keep the radius constant, the height at - say - zero and keep the angle as the only coordinate of the Hamiltonian and the wave function.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













              Your Answer





              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              });
              });
              }, "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function() {
              var channelOptions = {
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "431"
              };
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
              createEditor();
              });
              }
              else {
              createEditor();
              }
              });

              function createEditor() {
              StackExchange.prepareEditor({
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader: {
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              },
              onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              });


              }
              });






              prakash_amod is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f109678%2fwhy-doesnt-the-particle-in-a-ring-model-have-a-potential-energy-term%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              4












              $begingroup$

              The short answer is that the particle in a ring is defined to have no potential energy term. Once you introduce something else into the system, then it is no longer really the particle on a ring problem any more.



              However, if you want to relate it to the hydrogen atom, then note that in the hydrogen atom, the Coulomb potential is a function of only $r$, i.e.



              $$V(r) = -frac{1}{r}$$



              in atomic units. In the particle on a ring model system, the particle is already constrained to be at a particular value of $r$, so even if we were to hypothetically introduce a Coulomb-type potential $propto 1/r$, this would just be a constant. The effect of having a constant potential energy is just to shift every eigenstate up in energy by the same amount; it has no real physical effect.



              What are the differences in the mathematical solutions? Well, you already know it, surely; the eigenstates of the hydrogen atom are atomic orbitals, whereas the eigenstates of the particle on a ring are simply $exp(mathrm imphi)$ with $m in mathbb{Z}$ to satisfy the boundary condition.



              Of course, this $exp(mathrm imphi)$ term is indeed part of the mathematical form of the atomic orbitals. This is because when you solve the Schrödinger equation for the hydrogen atom, you can successively separate out different degrees of freedom. Firstly you separate the bit which depends on $r$, which goes on to become the radial wavefunction $R(r)$. Then you need to solve for the angular wavefunction $Y(theta,phi)$, and the way of doing this is to again use separation of variables, i.e. assume $Y(theta,phi) = f(theta)g(phi)$. That gets you to a differential equation which looks like $(-1/g)(mathrm d^2g/mathrm d phi^2) = m^2$, which has $g = exp(mathrm imphi)$ as its solutions. I'm glossing over some details here, but that's the general idea; consult e.g. Griffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics for the nitty-gritty bits.






              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$


















                4












                $begingroup$

                The short answer is that the particle in a ring is defined to have no potential energy term. Once you introduce something else into the system, then it is no longer really the particle on a ring problem any more.



                However, if you want to relate it to the hydrogen atom, then note that in the hydrogen atom, the Coulomb potential is a function of only $r$, i.e.



                $$V(r) = -frac{1}{r}$$



                in atomic units. In the particle on a ring model system, the particle is already constrained to be at a particular value of $r$, so even if we were to hypothetically introduce a Coulomb-type potential $propto 1/r$, this would just be a constant. The effect of having a constant potential energy is just to shift every eigenstate up in energy by the same amount; it has no real physical effect.



                What are the differences in the mathematical solutions? Well, you already know it, surely; the eigenstates of the hydrogen atom are atomic orbitals, whereas the eigenstates of the particle on a ring are simply $exp(mathrm imphi)$ with $m in mathbb{Z}$ to satisfy the boundary condition.



                Of course, this $exp(mathrm imphi)$ term is indeed part of the mathematical form of the atomic orbitals. This is because when you solve the Schrödinger equation for the hydrogen atom, you can successively separate out different degrees of freedom. Firstly you separate the bit which depends on $r$, which goes on to become the radial wavefunction $R(r)$. Then you need to solve for the angular wavefunction $Y(theta,phi)$, and the way of doing this is to again use separation of variables, i.e. assume $Y(theta,phi) = f(theta)g(phi)$. That gets you to a differential equation which looks like $(-1/g)(mathrm d^2g/mathrm d phi^2) = m^2$, which has $g = exp(mathrm imphi)$ as its solutions. I'm glossing over some details here, but that's the general idea; consult e.g. Griffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics for the nitty-gritty bits.






                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$
















                  4












                  4








                  4





                  $begingroup$

                  The short answer is that the particle in a ring is defined to have no potential energy term. Once you introduce something else into the system, then it is no longer really the particle on a ring problem any more.



                  However, if you want to relate it to the hydrogen atom, then note that in the hydrogen atom, the Coulomb potential is a function of only $r$, i.e.



                  $$V(r) = -frac{1}{r}$$



                  in atomic units. In the particle on a ring model system, the particle is already constrained to be at a particular value of $r$, so even if we were to hypothetically introduce a Coulomb-type potential $propto 1/r$, this would just be a constant. The effect of having a constant potential energy is just to shift every eigenstate up in energy by the same amount; it has no real physical effect.



                  What are the differences in the mathematical solutions? Well, you already know it, surely; the eigenstates of the hydrogen atom are atomic orbitals, whereas the eigenstates of the particle on a ring are simply $exp(mathrm imphi)$ with $m in mathbb{Z}$ to satisfy the boundary condition.



                  Of course, this $exp(mathrm imphi)$ term is indeed part of the mathematical form of the atomic orbitals. This is because when you solve the Schrödinger equation for the hydrogen atom, you can successively separate out different degrees of freedom. Firstly you separate the bit which depends on $r$, which goes on to become the radial wavefunction $R(r)$. Then you need to solve for the angular wavefunction $Y(theta,phi)$, and the way of doing this is to again use separation of variables, i.e. assume $Y(theta,phi) = f(theta)g(phi)$. That gets you to a differential equation which looks like $(-1/g)(mathrm d^2g/mathrm d phi^2) = m^2$, which has $g = exp(mathrm imphi)$ as its solutions. I'm glossing over some details here, but that's the general idea; consult e.g. Griffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics for the nitty-gritty bits.






                  share|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  The short answer is that the particle in a ring is defined to have no potential energy term. Once you introduce something else into the system, then it is no longer really the particle on a ring problem any more.



                  However, if you want to relate it to the hydrogen atom, then note that in the hydrogen atom, the Coulomb potential is a function of only $r$, i.e.



                  $$V(r) = -frac{1}{r}$$



                  in atomic units. In the particle on a ring model system, the particle is already constrained to be at a particular value of $r$, so even if we were to hypothetically introduce a Coulomb-type potential $propto 1/r$, this would just be a constant. The effect of having a constant potential energy is just to shift every eigenstate up in energy by the same amount; it has no real physical effect.



                  What are the differences in the mathematical solutions? Well, you already know it, surely; the eigenstates of the hydrogen atom are atomic orbitals, whereas the eigenstates of the particle on a ring are simply $exp(mathrm imphi)$ with $m in mathbb{Z}$ to satisfy the boundary condition.



                  Of course, this $exp(mathrm imphi)$ term is indeed part of the mathematical form of the atomic orbitals. This is because when you solve the Schrödinger equation for the hydrogen atom, you can successively separate out different degrees of freedom. Firstly you separate the bit which depends on $r$, which goes on to become the radial wavefunction $R(r)$. Then you need to solve for the angular wavefunction $Y(theta,phi)$, and the way of doing this is to again use separation of variables, i.e. assume $Y(theta,phi) = f(theta)g(phi)$. That gets you to a differential equation which looks like $(-1/g)(mathrm d^2g/mathrm d phi^2) = m^2$, which has $g = exp(mathrm imphi)$ as its solutions. I'm glossing over some details here, but that's the general idea; consult e.g. Griffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics for the nitty-gritty bits.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited 7 hours ago

























                  answered 7 hours ago









                  orthocresolorthocresol

                  39k7113237




                  39k7113237























                      3












                      $begingroup$

                      There is a potential energy of some sorts: The potential energy is constant within the ring, and infinitely high outside of it. This is an idealized situation similar to the particle in a box (one-dimensional, two-dimensional, three-dimensional).



                      Even though these models are artificial and ideal, they can be used to estimate properties of certain sets of molecules. For example, you can discuss the spectra of molecules with linear conjugated double bonds using the model of the one-dimensional particle in the box.



                      When setting up the Hamiltonian, you implicitly introduced a infinitely high potential by boundary conditions and choice of coordinate systems. The free electron would move in three dimensions. For the one-dimensional particle in the box, the choice of just one coordinate constrains the electron to one dimension, and the boundary conditions of an electron density of zero at the edges of the box constrains the electron to a certain length of box. For the particle in a ring, you can choose a cylindrical coordinate system, keep the radius constant, the height at - say - zero and keep the angle as the only coordinate of the Hamiltonian and the wave function.






                      share|improve this answer











                      $endgroup$


















                        3












                        $begingroup$

                        There is a potential energy of some sorts: The potential energy is constant within the ring, and infinitely high outside of it. This is an idealized situation similar to the particle in a box (one-dimensional, two-dimensional, three-dimensional).



                        Even though these models are artificial and ideal, they can be used to estimate properties of certain sets of molecules. For example, you can discuss the spectra of molecules with linear conjugated double bonds using the model of the one-dimensional particle in the box.



                        When setting up the Hamiltonian, you implicitly introduced a infinitely high potential by boundary conditions and choice of coordinate systems. The free electron would move in three dimensions. For the one-dimensional particle in the box, the choice of just one coordinate constrains the electron to one dimension, and the boundary conditions of an electron density of zero at the edges of the box constrains the electron to a certain length of box. For the particle in a ring, you can choose a cylindrical coordinate system, keep the radius constant, the height at - say - zero and keep the angle as the only coordinate of the Hamiltonian and the wave function.






                        share|improve this answer











                        $endgroup$
















                          3












                          3








                          3





                          $begingroup$

                          There is a potential energy of some sorts: The potential energy is constant within the ring, and infinitely high outside of it. This is an idealized situation similar to the particle in a box (one-dimensional, two-dimensional, three-dimensional).



                          Even though these models are artificial and ideal, they can be used to estimate properties of certain sets of molecules. For example, you can discuss the spectra of molecules with linear conjugated double bonds using the model of the one-dimensional particle in the box.



                          When setting up the Hamiltonian, you implicitly introduced a infinitely high potential by boundary conditions and choice of coordinate systems. The free electron would move in three dimensions. For the one-dimensional particle in the box, the choice of just one coordinate constrains the electron to one dimension, and the boundary conditions of an electron density of zero at the edges of the box constrains the electron to a certain length of box. For the particle in a ring, you can choose a cylindrical coordinate system, keep the radius constant, the height at - say - zero and keep the angle as the only coordinate of the Hamiltonian and the wave function.






                          share|improve this answer











                          $endgroup$



                          There is a potential energy of some sorts: The potential energy is constant within the ring, and infinitely high outside of it. This is an idealized situation similar to the particle in a box (one-dimensional, two-dimensional, three-dimensional).



                          Even though these models are artificial and ideal, they can be used to estimate properties of certain sets of molecules. For example, you can discuss the spectra of molecules with linear conjugated double bonds using the model of the one-dimensional particle in the box.



                          When setting up the Hamiltonian, you implicitly introduced a infinitely high potential by boundary conditions and choice of coordinate systems. The free electron would move in three dimensions. For the one-dimensional particle in the box, the choice of just one coordinate constrains the electron to one dimension, and the boundary conditions of an electron density of zero at the edges of the box constrains the electron to a certain length of box. For the particle in a ring, you can choose a cylindrical coordinate system, keep the radius constant, the height at - say - zero and keep the angle as the only coordinate of the Hamiltonian and the wave function.







                          share|improve this answer














                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer








                          edited 4 hours ago

























                          answered 7 hours ago









                          Karsten TheisKarsten Theis

                          1,787323




                          1,787323






















                              prakash_amod is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                              draft saved

                              draft discarded


















                              prakash_amod is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                              prakash_amod is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                              prakash_amod is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid



                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                              Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f109678%2fwhy-doesnt-the-particle-in-a-ring-model-have-a-potential-energy-term%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                              }
                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Fluorita

                              Hulsita

                              Península de Txukotka