4-1] INTERACTION AMONG PARTICLES 87
10-10 esu is the fundamental electronic charge, and Z and Z' are the
CHAPTER 4 Nuclear interactions, which come into play only at much smaller dis-
THE SCHRODINGER EQUATION
4-1 Interaction among partic1es. In the preceding chapters, the quan-
tum-mechanical description of free particles has been considered. However,
the theory would be of no value if it could not be extended to include the
interactions among particles. The effects o such interactions do, in fact,
playa much more fundamental role in quantum mechanics than in classical
newtonian physics; it has already been pointed out how interactions,
introduced by the process of measurement, have a finite, nonnegligible
influence on the quantum state of an atomic system.
Four fundamental and closely related questions arise when the inter-
actions among particles are considered: (1) How can the concept of state
be extended to systems that contain more than one particle? Classically,
the state of a system at a particular instant is known if the position and
the velocity of each of its component particles are given at that instant.
In quantum theory, an appropriate generalization of the one-particle
wave function must be found, such that the results of observations can
be calculated by rules analogous to those set forth in Section 2-10.
(2) What are the intrinsic properties of the particles found in nature,
and what types of interactions exist between them? ("Intrinsic" properties
are the mass, electric charge, spin, and other quantum-mechanical proper-
ties which characterize the wave function of a "free" particle of given type.)
The answer to this question is obviously a matter of experimento However,
modern relativistic quantum theory provides a structure that permits
us to predict the characteristics of possible types of particles and to classify
them in a clear and elegant way ..
It is remarkable that only two fundamental types of interactions were
known prior to 1930, namely, the newtonian gravitational force and
electrical forces, typified by the Coulomb force of electrostatics. The
former does not enter into the discussion of atomic systems because it is
about 1040 times smaller than the Coulomb force between two elementary
charged particles. In atomic physics, therefore, we are concerned with
systems of charged particles which interact according to the familiar law
o electrostatics,
ZZ'e2
F=--, (4-1)
1'2
which is the force acting between two particles, of charges Ze and Z' e,
respectively, along the line of length r joining their positions (e = -4.8 x
86
"atornic numbers").
tances than those of interest for atomic systems 10-12 cm), are of a
fundamentally difIerent kind. It has not yet been possible to achieve a
clear theoretical picture of the e forces, comparable to the understanding
of electrical forces in terms of the theory of Maxwell and Faraday. How-
ever, there is evidence to support the view that the problem of nuclear
forces wil! be solved when a correct description of the interaction between
nuclear particles and mesons has been developed.
In recent times, a large number o "fundamentalv particles'!' have been
discovered, and other interactions have become known, including those
associated with the beta decay o nuclei and the interactions among the
various mesons. In any experiment dealing with the e effect , the energy of
the particles is comparable to their rest energy, and a relativistic treatment
is required. These phenomena will not be considered in the present book.
(3) How are the interactions between particles propagated? In electro-
magnetic theory, the mode of propagation is described classically by
Maxwell's equations for the electromagnetic field which is propagated in
empty space with the velocity of light. The speed o the electrons within
atorns is usually small relative to the velocity of light, and effects ascribable
to the finite time of propagation of the field are, in general, of secondary
importance. The static law (4-1) can therefore be u ed as a good approxi-
mation in formulating a theory of atoms. Apart from this, however, it
is believed that every correct physical theory must conform to the re-
quirements o special relativity; the association of a ~-field with the
particles allows a relativistically correct, and hence more profoundly
satisfying, picture o interacting fields than any model that could have
been constructed on classical foundations. The field theory of quantum
phenomena had its origins in theoretical studies o the interactions between
atomic systems and lightl21 and in the justification o the assumptions
which Einstein used in his derivation of the radiation law (Section 1-3).
Quantum field theory is the basic discipline in terms of which modern
ideas in fundamental-particle physics are expressed.
(4) How do we include interactions in the wave-mechanical formalism?
We must formulate equations which express the modifications of the wave
function resulting from interactions among the particles described. Ob-
viously, this problem is closely associated with the answer to our first
question, concerning the extension of the concept of state, because at least
1 A. M. Shapiro, Revs. Modern Phys. 28, 164 (1956). J. D. Jackson, The
Physics of Elementary Particles. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958.
2 W. Heisenberg and W. Pauli, Z. Physik 9, 338 (1931). See also E. Fermi,
Revs. Modern Phys. 1,87 (1932).
88 THE SCHRODl~GER EQUATlO~ [CHAP. 4 4-2] GEOMETRICAL OPTICS 9

two particles are involved in every interaction. However, in many situa-
tions, the influence of interaction on a single particle may be described
without reference to the motions of others, provided the concept of poten-
tial energy is applicable. The particle is conceived to move in a fixed field
of force that arises from its surroundings. At each point of space, the force
on the particle is then given by
F = -'VV, (4-2)
which acts upon a particle of charge e, moving with velocity v in a magnetic
field of intensity lB, is explicitly velocity-dependent, and therefore not
describable by Eq. (4-2). It may, however, be expressed in terms of the
vector potential A for the magnetic field and thu brought into the single-
particle theory. For atomic systems, the force (4-4) is smaller than the
Coulomb force by a factor of order v2 fe2, approximately, and hence makes
a small, although important, contribution to the energies of atomic states.

where V is the potential energy, which depends only upon the position of
the particle.'!' For a two-particle system, this description can be intro-
duced rigorously by con idering the relative motion of the two particles in
the frame of reference in which the center of mass is at rest, [21 and we shall
see in Chapter 7 that this classical device can be adapted without change
to the quantum treatment. More complicated ystem can al o be treated
in an approximate way whenever one of the particles can be con idered to
move in the average field produced by its interactions with the others.
This single-particle model provides a valuable starting point for under-
standing the states of complex atomic and nuclear systems.
The description o the force on a particle by means of a potential
function is based, of course, on the fundamental assumptions concerning
the field of force which are requisite for the definition of V. [31 In the case
of the Coulomb force (4-1), these requirements are sati fied, and one has
ZZ'e2
V=-- (4-3)
r
In other instances (e.g. nuclear forces), however, one can properly question
the validity of Eq. (4-2) on the basis that the forces do not admit the
definition of a potential energy. An important example arises when the
force is dependent upon the velocity of the particle as well as upon its
position. Much attention has been given to the question whether such
forces may be of importance in nuclear interactions. [41 The Lorentz force
4-2 Geometricaloptics. The wave theory must be modified in order to
include forces which can be expressed by means of a potential energy.
This modification can be conjectured from the correspondence principle,
by analogy with the well-known parallelism between geometrical optics
and newtonian mechanics, developed by Hamilton. The laws o geo-
metrical optics can be deduced from the laws of wave optics, i.e., from
Maxwell's equations; they repre ent an approximation which holds pro-
vided that the wavelength of the light is very short in comparison to the
size of the refracting 01' refecting objects in the field. It will now be
shown that, by analogy, newtonian mechanics can be considered to be a
similar approximation, derived from wave mechanics and subject to the
same restriction, that is, the de Broglie wavelength mu t be small com-
pared to the dimensions of the physical objects involved. The diagram
of Fig. 4-1 is helpful in under tanding the e similarities between optics
and mechanics. It is instructive to consider in detail the connections
indicated in the figure; we shall, therefore, digress briefly and describe
the transition from wave optics to geometrical optics.
According to Huygens' principie, the cour e of a beam of light traver -
ing an i otropic optical medium of varying index of refraction can be
Wave optics OpticaI waveIength -> O GeometricaI optics
(Maxwell's equations)

F
e
= -v X lB, (4-4)
1
Analogy assumed in 1
e formulation of Analogy traced by
Schrodinger equation Hamilton's theory
1 G. Joos, Theoretical Physics. ew York: G. E. Stechert and Co., 1934,
Chapter V, Section 4.
2 Cf. Chapter 1, Section 1-11.
3 G. Joos, lococit.
4 J. A. Wbeeler, Phys. Rev. 50, 643 (1936). CL also the discussions in R. G.
j
Wave
de Broglie waveIength -> O 1
Sachs, Nuclear Theory. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc., mechanics
ewtonian
(Correspondence principle) meehanics
1953, Section 4-2. Also, J. 1\1. Blatt and V. F. Weisskopf, Theoretical Nuclear
Physics. ew York: John Wiley and Sons, 1952, Chapter III, Section 3. FIG. 4-1. Analogy between optics and mechanics.
 [CHAP. 4 4-2) GEOMETRICAL OPTICS 91
90 THE SCHRODINGER EQUATION

points. To prove this, consider two nearby wave surfaces , 1:' and 1:",
traced by means of the geometrical construction shown in Fig. 4-2.
between which the integral o Eq. (4-6) receives a contribution (J..I./e) ds.
The wavefront 1: is the orthogonal trajectory of the optical rays in the
By construction, this quantity is the same for every normal line (e.g.
medium; it is related to the neighboring wavefront 1:', occupied by the
QQ') joining these surfaces; but for a path QR, which is not normal, it is
disturbance at a short time (t.t) later, in the following way: At each point
J..I. ds' = J..I. ds/cos e, where e is the angle between QR and the normal.
P of 1:, one constructs a sphere of radius v t.t, where v is the velocity of light
Since cos e :::; 1, it follows that
in the medium in the neighborhood of that point, i.e.,

e
v =-'J..I.' J..I. = index of refraction at P. (4-5) !
e
fJ..l. ds' > ! fJ..l.
- e
ds. (4-7)

The wavefront 1:' is the envelope of the family of spheres constructed in this This is Fermat's prineiple oi least time, summarized in the statement that
manner at each point of 1:. By repeating this process and passing to the the time o propagation of light between two points in an optical medium
limit t.t ~ O, one obtains a system of wave surfaces and their orthogonal is smaller than the time which would be computed for any other path in
trajectories, or rays!" (Problem 4-1). the medium joining the same two points. In the notation of the calculus
Now consider a system of wavefronts and rays generated by an initial of variations, (1) Fermat's principIe can be written
surface 1:0. The time of propagation of light along a ray PoP from 1:0 to 1:
is, by construction, !e fJ..l. ds = (constant frequency). (4-8)
t=
1p
Po
ds
-=-
v
1
e
1P
Po
J..I.ds (4-6)
'

The index of refraction in a dispersive medium depends, of course, upon

the frequency of the light, and the variation implied in Eq. (4-8) is to be
(see Fig. 4-3). It is easy to show that this time is shorter than the time
made for light of a given constant frequency.
(computed by the same formula) for any other path joining these two
The wave surfaces can be defined by the equation

s = et = (T.
}T.o
J..I. ds = constant, (4-9)
~'
where S is the optical path length for the system of rays in question. It is
easy to demonstrate, by the methods of the calculus of variations or by
geometrical arguments similar to those just made, that the content of
Eq. (4-8) is also expressed by the differential equation'"

(4-10)

which must be satisfied by every function S that describes a system of

rays in a medium of index J..I. (Appendix A-5). It will now be shown how
Eq. (4-10) can be regarded as an approximate expression of the behavior
of light waves in the limit of small wavelength.
2:0 2:' z

Fra. 4-2. Huygens' construction. Fra. 4-3. Construction for the deri- 1 G. Joos, Theoretical Physics. New York: G. E. Stechert and Co. 1934
vation o Fermat's principle o least time. Chapter IV. ' ,
2 P. ~rank and ~. v. Mises, D,ie 0fferential- und Integralgleichungen der
Mechamk und PhYS1.k. Braunschweig: Friedrich Vieweg und Sohn 1935 Volume
1 J. L. Synge, Geometrical Optics, an Introduction to Hamilton's Method. II, Chapter 1, Section l. ' ,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1937.
92 THE SCHRODlNGER EQUATIO [CHAP. 4 4-3) ANALOGY BETWEE~ OPTrCS A D MECHA lCS 93

It follows froro Maxwell's equations'!' that the relation
(4-11)
is satisfied by each coroponent of the electroroagnetic field vectors in a
light wave, provided that the local wavelength A = 21r/k is small in
comparison with a distance in which the index of refraction undergoes
an appreciable change, i.e., provided that AIV'p.1 1. Under these cireum-
stances, it is reasonable to expect that the light will be propagated locally
as if the index of refraction were constant, and that the effect of the
variation of p. will be felt slowly, that is, only after a distance of roany
wavelengths has been traversed. These considerations lead us to an
approxiroate solution of Eq. (4-11) in the forro
The amplitude factor </lo is expected to be a slowly varying function of posi-
tion, describing the effect on the intensity of the varying divergence of the
rays from place to place in the medium. The quantity leo = 21r/AO is the
wave number for waves of the same frequency in free space, and the func-
tion S is the optical path length, expressing the effect of the refractive
medium on the phase of the wave disturbance. It is readily shown that
the quantity S satisfies the differential equation (4-10) and is, therefore,
identical with the optical path length of the geometrical theory. Differen-
tiation of Eq. (4-12) yields
V'2</1 = [ikoV'S (V'</Io + iko</loV'S) + V'2</1o + ikoV'</Io . V'S
+ iko</loV'2S]eikoS;
and by substituting Eq. (4-13) into Eq. (4-11), cancelling the exponential
factor, and equating real and imaginary parts,121 we obtain
and S therefore satisfies Eq. (4-10). Equation (4-15) relates to the in-
tensity of the light and can al o be derived from the georoetrical theory.!!'
The approxirnation j ust described i a very useful one in the theory of
waves. It will be encountered again in the discus ion of the WKB method
of solving the Schrodinger equation, which provides a link between wave
mechanics and the older quantization rule of Bohr and Sommerfeld.
4-3 Analogy between optics and roechanics. With the preceding sketch
of optical theory, we are prepared to describe Hamilton's analogy between
georoetrical optics and the classical mechanics of a particle moving in a
field of force. It is shown in works on dynamics!" that the orbit of a
particle moving in accordance with Newton's laws can be deduced froro
the principle oi least action:
(4-12)
~J p(x, y, z, E) ds = 0, E constant. (4-16)
According to this principIe, the path followed by a particle in a field of force
described by the potential energy function Vi such that the value of the
action Jp ds is stationary when coropared to other paths which have the
saroe end points and are traversed with the ame total energy. The mo-
mentum of a particle of mass m and total energy E is .given by
p = V2m(E - V). (4-17)
The formal sirnilarity between Eq. (4-16) and Eq. (4-8) is at once apparent:
The problems of geometrical optics and of particle dynamics be come
formally identical if the index of refraction is regarded as the optical
(4-13) analogue of the momentum of the particle. This is Hamilton's analogy.
Equation (4-8) can also be written in the form
1

(4-14)
~
f A(X, y, z, v)
ds = 0, v constant, (4-18)

in which A = (l/p.)(c/v) is the local wavelength. The quantum relations

and h
(4-15) P=X and E = h, (4-19)

In accordance with the approximations described, the second term in the connecting the wavelength and frequency of matter waves with the mo-
right-hand merober of Eq. (4-14) is vanishingly small in the lirnit A -t 0, mentum and energy o the corresponding particle, impart a much deeper

1 J. A. Stratton, Electromagnetic Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1 P. Frank and R. v. Mises, loco cit. Cf. Problem 4-2.
Inc., 1941, page 342, Examples 10 and 11. Cf. also Appendix A-6. . 2.R. Goldstein, Classica~ 111echanics. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub-
2 It is a good exercise Ior the reader to justify the assumption that the func- lishing Co., Inc., 1950,Section 7-5. L. Page, Introduction to Theoretical Physics.
tions </lo and S can be assumed to be real. 2nd ed. New York: D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., 1935, Chapter IV, Section 55.
9-1 THE SCHRODINGER EQUATIO:>I [CHAP. 4 4-4) PRI:>ICIPLE OF UPERPOSITIO:\' OF STATES
95
significance to the parallelism between Eqs. (4-16) and (4-18). It is
The assumption is made that this equation gives the time behavior
natural to a sume that an equation of the form (4-18) holds also for a
of every wave function belonging to a system of fixed energy, so that
quantum-mechanical system and provides an approximation to the wave Eq. (4-21) may equally well be written
theory if the wavelength i very hort; i.e., preci ely in the situation in
which the newtonian laws must follow from the more complete theory. _ .!!Z... 'r72.1. + V.I. Ii QV;
The final step in this heuristic reasoning is made if we assume that the 2m v 'f' 'f' = - i at' (4-25)
matter waves, expressed by the wave function 1/1,are correctly described
by an equation analogous to Eq. (4-11), in which the wave number is ~his is the Schrodinger equation containing the time. It is the generaliza-
determined by Eqs. (4-19) and (4-17): tion of Eq. (2-98). In this simple case, it provides an answer to the
fourth que tion rai ed in Section 4-1, i.e. to the que tion of how inter-

k2 = (2;)2 = ~r: (E - V). (4-20)

actions can be included in the wave-mechanical formalismo
Finally, to interpret 1/1,we as ume that the formulae for the expectations
The result is o.f physical quanti.ties, which were derived in the free-particle case ( ec-
tion 2-10), hold without change. pecifically,
(4-21)
f 1/I*rifdr f
1/1*
(liji)'V'" dr
which i chrodinger's equation. (r) = ; (P) = -~-- (4-26)
It will now be assumed that the Schrodinger equation is exactly satis- f1/l*1/Idr f1/l*"'dr
fied 111 by the wave function for a particle in the field V, and its conse-
quences will be developed on the ba is of the Born interpretation. The time-dependent Schrodinger equation (4-25) is the central relation
First, it is noted that the Schrodinger equation (4-21) applies to a of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics and forms the basis for most of
system that consists of a single particle of mass m in a field of potential the work presented in the remainder of this book.
energy V, the total energy being given and constant. The time dependence
of the wave function is not specified. However, in the special case of a free 4-4 Principle of superposition of states. [11 The discussion leading to
particle (V = O), one has Eq. (4-25) .was founded on the wave theory for a particle of fixed energy.
However, smce the Schrodinger equation is a linear equation its solutions
(4-22) obey t~e principle of superposition. Hence, if two solutio~s 1/11and "'2
(belongmg, perhaps, to different values of E) are known, other solutions
this expression is the same a the Schrdinger equation for a free particle can be constructed, of the form
obtained in Eq. (2-98), provided that
(4-27)
(4-23) ':,ith arbitrary choice of the constants al and a2. Furthermore the func-
tion 1/1will .satisfy the same conditions of continuity and integrability
This differential equation in t implies that the time behavior of 1/1is de- th~t ~re satisfied by "'1
and 1/12' In addition, we assume as a fundamental
scribed by pn~clple that every alIowable solution of Eq. (4-25) corresponds to a
realizable st~te of ~he system. Indeed, this principie of superposition
1/I(r, t) = 1/I(r,O) exp [ - ~ Et] . (4-24) played a b~slc role I? the discus ion of wave packets in Chapter 2: The
repres~ntatlOn of '" 10 Eq. (2-89) is a linear combination of functions
1 ote that Eq. (4-11) is not exactly satisfied by the Maxwell field, so that ~xp ((tjl)(px - Et)], each of which satisfies Eq. (4-25) and is a state in
the analogy to optical phenomena is not (even formally) complete. An analogy its own right (cf. Section 3-5).
of this kind exists for any pair of wave fields. CL C. Eckart, "The Approximate
Solution of One-Dimensional Wave Equations," Revs. Modern Phys. 20, 399 1 P. A. M. Dirae, The Principles oi Quantum Mechanics. 3rd ed. Oxford: The
(1948). Clarendon Press, 1947, Chapter 1.
 [CHAP. 4 4-5) PROBABILITY C RRE!IIT 97
THE SCHRODh GER EQUATION
96
tion o the fluid velocity v, then the equation (4-31) expresses the con-
Quantum mechanics is, therefore, a linear theory, and many o~ the
servation law ; i.e., a change in the total amount of fluid contained within
elassical methods which have been developed for tbe treatment of linear
any small fixed volume element is accounted for by fow through the surface
problems (such as tbe vibrating string, optical waves, etc.) are immedi~t~ly
of the volume element. ing Gau ' divergence theorem, the equation
adaptable. It must be borne in mind, bowever, tb~t "tbe. superposition
of continuity can be tran Iormed to the integral form
which occurs in quantum mecbanics is of an essentlally different nature
from any occurring in the classical theory, ,,[11 and tbat analogi~s to .tbe
interpretation of results in classical pbysics are very likely ~o ?e misleading.
There is no analogue, in classical dynamics, to the principle of super-
~t Iv p dr = - i S. n da, (4-33)

position of states. in which n is the unit outward normal to the surface ~ wbicb encloses
a region of volume V. The interpretation o Eq. (-1-33) is similar to
4-5 Probability current. Tbe remainder of this chapter will be devoted tbat o Eq. (4-31).
to a discussion o certain general properties of the solutions o the Schro- The interpretation of the quantity "'*'"
as probability density leads;
dinger equation (4-25); the e properties hold for all single-particle wave therefore, to the concept o the probability current [Eq. (4-32)]. The
functions, independently o special assumptions as to the or~ o tbe decrease of the probability o finding a particle within V can be described
potential energy. Since V is a real quantity, the complex conjugate o in terms o an outward 60w o probability current through the surface of
Eq. (4-25) is V. Tbe de crease o probability arise , of cour e, because o the change o '"
with time.
- 2m
h
2
,..,2.1.*
v '1'
+ V.I.* _ ~ a",* .
'1' - i at '
(4-28)
If tbe wave function is regarded as belonging to a collection of non-
interacting particles ( ection 2-9), then tbe expectation o the vector S
V can be eliminated between Eqs. (4-25) and (4-28), and we obtain can be con idered to be the average particle current. The wave function
'" = exp (ijl)p . r lead , for example, to

~ (.'.*V2", "'V2",*) = ~("'* a", + a",* "'),

2m '1'
_
t at at (4-29)
S = ! lm[ exp ( - ~ p . r) .~ p exp (~ p . r)] = ~ = v, (4-34)

which is the same as

which is ju t the current for a beam o particles of unit density ("'*'" = 1)
and velocity V.
- 2:m V ("'*V'" - "'V"'*) = ft ("'*"'). (4-30)
It is assumed that the equation o continuity holds at every point o
space, and that '" and its derivative are continuous everywhere. Hence
This relation has the form o the equation of continuity, i.e., tbe possibility o sources for p is excluded, as must be the case if '" i to be
normalizable independently of the time. DI It can be noted, incidentally,
ap (4-31)
-+VS=O that Eq. (4-33), when applied to the entire volume o space, generalizes
at ' the normalization theorem o Section 2-9 to the case in wbich the particle
in which p = "'*'" is the probability density, and S the probability current: is not free. The absence of sources for the ",-field results from tbe horno-
geneous character o the Schrodinger equation.
In any state for which V . S is zero, the probability density is constant
S =~ (",*V", - ",V",*) = ! 1m (",*V",). (4-32)
2tm m in time [Eq. (4-31)]. Sucb states are called stationary. The most important
case arises for states of fixed energy, for which the time dependence of '"
Equation (4-31) arises in any theory in which ~n extensive quantity is given by Eq. (4-24), and ",(r, O) satisfies thereore the time-independent
(e.g., mass, cbarge, or heat energy) is known to satisy a law o ~onser,:a-
Schrodinger equation (4-21). Except for the presence o '" itself, however,
tion. If, for example, p represents the density o a compressible ~wd,
and S = pv is the current of fluid crossing unit area normal to the direc- 1 The integral JI"'12 dr would be constant if there were a distribution of sources
and sinks for p, of equal and opposite total strengths. However, no such distri-
bution is permitted.
1 P. A. M. Dirac, op. cit., page 14.
9 THE SCHRODINGER EQ ATION [CHAP. 4 4-6] MOTIO. OF WAVE PACKETS 99
this equation is entirely real. onsequently, if 1/;(1', O) is a complex solution This equation can be transformed, by means of Eq. (4-25) and its complex
of Eq. (4-21), it can be separated into real and imaginary parts, each of conjugate Eq. (4-28), into
which is itself a solution. It is possible that the e two solutions are linearly
independent of each other; if this is so, we have a case of degeneracy in
which more than one physically distinguishable state belongs to the same
value of the total energy. However, if the state in question is nonde-
generate, then the real and imaginary parts of 1/;(1', O) must describe the
same state, and therefore differ from 1/;(1', O) only by a multiplicative (4-38)
(complex) constant. The value of this constant is at OUT disposal; hence
the function 1/;(1', O) in Eq. (4-24) can always be chosen to be real, provided The vector identity
the state in question is nondegenerate. Thus, according to Eq. (4-32),
the current is zero for nondegenerate stationary states. (4-39)
There are no nondegenerate stationary states for a free particle. Indeed,
the state exp[(ijh)(p . 1')] is a free-particle state of energy E for every can now be used to obtain
vector p of magnitude V2mE. It follows that the above argument con-
cerning nondegenerate state applies only to bound states.
of degeneracy of quantum state will be discus ed further and illustrated
by examples later in the texto
The subject
dJ;> = - ! Irn / [V' . (xy.,*V'''-) - ''-* ~~J dI' (4-40)

4-6 Motion of wave packets. The principIe of correspondence between = 1./..-* ~ a..- dt,
m '/, ax (4-41)
the motion of a wave packet and the motion of a classical particle has been
of fundamental significance in the development of quantum mechanics
and is es ential in the interpretation of the theory. A calculation due to In obtaining Eq. (4-40), we have omitted the second term in Eq. (4-39)
Ehrenfe t[lI will now be made, which demon trates that the newtonian since it is purely real. The integral of the divergence in Eq. (4-40) can be
law of motion, in the form shown to vanish by application of Gaus 's theorem and of the boundary
conditions on 1/;. It follows from Eq. (4-26) that Eq. (4-41) is just the
dI' P dp
(a) (b) -V'V, (4-35) quantum counterpart of the classical relation between velocity and position:
dt = m' dt

are satisfied exactly by the average motion of a wave packet described by

(4-42)
a wave function 1/; which is a solution of the Schrdinger equation. For
simplicity, we shall deal with the components of t and p in the direction In a similar way, we have
of the z-axis, and assume that 1/; is a normalized wave function. The
average or expectation of x for the packet is (Px) = /..-* ~ a..- ds
'/, ax '

and hence differentiation

(x) = /1/;*x1/; dx,

(cf. Section 2-10) yields

(4-36)
~ (Px) = ~ f [ate* V'1/; + ''-*V' ~~1 dt

d(x)
dt
= f [a..-* xy., +
al
1/;* a..-J d
x at r. (4-37)
= / {- :~ [V'z1/;*~N - ''-*V'(V'z..-)] + V(1/;*V'1/;) - ..-*V'(v..-)L dt

1 P. Ehrenfest, Z. Physik 45, 455 (1927). = - :~ f [V'z..-* ~ - ''-*V'z :J f

dI' - 1/;* (~:) 1/; ds, (4-43)
100 THE SCHRODINGER EQUATlO:-< [CHAP. 4
101
By Green's second identity the first integral is zero, and according to PROBLEMS
the general definition of expectation, the second integral is -(ay /ax),
whence 4-1. Show that the rays and wave surfaces obtained by Huygens' construction
are mutually orthogonal provided the medium is isotropic.
d(p,,) = (_ ay) . (4-44) 4-2. The intensity of the light in an optical medium can be described in terms
dt ax ' o~ the vector 1 = le, where l is the energy which crosses unit area perpen-
dicular to a ray in one second, and e is a unit vector paralIel to the rayo Show
this i the quantum equivalent of the z-component of Eq. [4-35(b)]. Thus that V . 1 = O, and hence
the expectations of position, momentum, and force obey ewton's second
law of motion exactly. This is an expression of the correspondence prin- v2S+VS.Vln(f) = O.
cipie for wave packets which has now been founded on the Schrodinger
equation. [Hint: In terms of S, e
is given by e
= CIj}.L)VS.] Compare this result with
Eq. (4-15) and show that the two expressions are consistent in view of the
approximations made in obtaining the latter.
REFERENCES 4-3. Show that, for a normalized one-dimensional wave packet,

f'"
DE BROGLIE, L., and BRILLOUIN,L., Selected Papers on Wave Mechanics.
London: Blackie and on Limited, 192. E pecially: "On the Parallelism S dx = (p).
-00 m
between the Dynamics of a Material Par tic le and Geometrical Optics."
DIRAC, P. A. 1., The Principle oi Quantum Mechamics, 3rd ed. Oxford: The Generalize to the three-dimensional case and comment on the physical meaning
Clarendon Press, 1947. Chapter 1 emphasizes the fundamental importance of of this relation.
the principle of superposition. 4-4. Calculate the probability current corresponding to the wave function
ECKART,C., "The Approximate olution of One-Dimensional Wave Equa-
tions," Revs. Modern Phys. 20, 399 (1948). A general review of approximate
methods related to the classical approximation. Wave systems in other fields of
physics are discussed.
Joos, G., Theoretical Physics. New York: G. E. Stechert and Co., 1934. where r2
resulto
x
2
+ y2 + z2. Examine S for large values of r and interpret the
Chapter IV is a clear, concise summary of the calculus of variations.