Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:quant-ph/0307014 · European Journal of Physics

Comparing classical and quantum probability distributions for an asymmetric infinite well

M. A. Doncheski, Richard W. Robinett

Published Apr 5, 2000• 27 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We compare the classical and quantum mechanical position-space probability densities for a particle in an asymmetric infinite well. In an idealized system with a discontinuous step in the middle of the well, the classical and quantum probability distributions agree fairly well, even for relatively small quantum numbers, except for anomalous cases which arise due to the unphysical nature of the potential. We are able to derive upper and lower bounds on the differences between the quantum and classical results. We also qualitatively discuss the momentum-space probability densities for this system using intuitive ideas about the amount of time a classical particle spends in various parts of the well. This system provides an excellent example of a non-trivial, but tractable, quantum mechanical bound state problem where the correlations between the amplitude and curvature of quantum mechanical wavefunctions can be easily compared to classical intuition about particle motion, with quantitative success, but also warning of possible surprises in non-physical limiting cases.

DOI
10.1088/0143-0807/21/3/303

Related papers

Visualizing classical and quantum probability densities for momentum using variations on familiar one-dimensional potentials

Richard W. Robinett

After briefly reviewing the definitions of classical probability densities for position, P CL ( x ), and for momentum, P CL ( p ), we present several examples of classical mechanical potential systems, mostly variations on such familiar cases as the infinite well and the uniformly accelerated particle for which the classical distributions can be easily derived and visualized. We focus especially on a simple potential which interpolates between the symmetric linear potential, V ( x ) = F | x |, and the infinite well, which can illustrate, in a mathematically straightforward way, how the divergent δ-function classical probability density for momentum for the infinite well can be seen to arise. Such examples can help students understand the quantum mechanical momentum-space wavefunction (and its corresponding probability density) in much the same way that other semiclassical techniques, such as the WKB approximation, can be used to visualize position-space wavefunctions.

arXiv:quant-ph/0307056•European Journal of Physics•Jan 30, 2002•11 citations

Quantum and classical probability distributions for position and momentum

Richard W. Robinett

The classical and quantum probability distributions for both position and momentum are compared for several model systems admitting bound states including the harmonic oscillator, the infinite well, and the linear confining potential (V(x)=F‖x‖). Examples corresponding to unbound systems, including the uniformly accelerating particle and the motion of a particle moving away from a point of unstable equilibrium, i.e., the ‘‘unstable oscillator’’ defined by V(x)=−kx2/2, are also considered. The quantum and classical distribution of kinetic and potential energy for the harmonic oscillator is briefly discussed.

American Journal of Physics•Sep 1, 1995•78 citations

The biharmonic oscillator and asymmetric linear potentials: from classical trajectories to momentum-space probability densities in the extreme quantum limit

L J Ruckle, Mario Belloni, Richard W. Robinett

The biharmonic oscillator and the asymmetric linear well are two confining power-law-type potentials for which complete bound-state solutions are possible in both classical and quantum mechanics. We examine these problems in detail, beginning with studies of their trajectories in position and momentum space, evaluation of the classical probability densities for both x and p, and calculation of the corresponding quantum-mechanical solutions which give |?n(x)|2 and |?n(p)|2 for comparison to their classical counterparts in the?classically allowed regions. We then focus on the behavior of ?n(p) for large momenta, motivated by recent studies of the very direct connections between the continuity behavior of V(x) and the large-p limit of the momentum-space wavefunction.

European Journal of Physics•Sep 3, 2012•1 citation

More on the asymmetric infinite square well: energy eigenstates with zero curvature

L. P. Gilbert, Mario Belloni, M. A. Doncheski +1 more

We extend the standard treatment of the asymmetric infinite square well to include solutions that have zero curvature over part of the well. This type of solution, both within the specific context of the asymmetric infinite square well and within the broader context of bound states of arbitrary piecewise-constant potential energy functions, is not often discussed as part of quantum mechanics texts at any level. We begin by outlining the general mathematical condition in one-dimensional time-independent quantum mechanics for a bound-state wavefunction to have zero curvature over an extended region of space and still be a valid wavefunction. We then briefly review the standard asymmetric infinite square well solutions, focusing on zero-curvature solutions as represented by energy eigenstates in position and momentum space.

arXiv:quant-ph/0512156•European Journal of Physics•Jul 8, 2005•19 citations

Some Similarities Between Classical Statistical and Quantum Mechanics?

Francesco R. Ruggeri

Quantum mechanics is often compared with classical mechanics because both may deal with a single particle subject to a potential. Classical mechanics is said to be deterministic describing x(t) and its derivatives i.e showing how a particle moves and accelerates while bound state quantum mechanics produces a real wavefunction W(x) such that W(x)W(x) yields a spatial density profile. The comparison is carried further with the correspondence principle which states that at high energy levels quantum mechanics should mimic classical mechanics. Classical mechanics does not simply describe x(t) and its derivatives i.e. deterministic motion. It also includes two body scattering, force and torque balances for a stationary object etc. In the case of the classical statistical mechanics of an equilibrium ideal gas, the Maxwell-Boltzmann (MB) distribution in the absence of a potential is C1 exp(- pp/(2mT) ). If a potential V(x) is added, one may find P(x) two different ways using Newtonian ideas. The first is to consider the gas as a collective entity like a tiny macroscopic classical object at x. Then one may argue that equilibrium means the system is stationary and apply Newtonian statics i.e. a balance of pressures and -dV/dx to obtain exp(-V(x)/T) as is often done in textbooks. Alternatively, one may consider a single particle and apply Newtonian mechanics differently, namely use a conservation of energy equation: p1p1/2m + V(x1) = p2p2/2m + V(x2). Again one obtains exp(-V(x)/T). The spatial part of probability may be based on Newtonian mechanics indicating that it is not stochastic. The stochastic function is C1 exp(-pp/2mT). Interestingly, however, the two Newtonian approaches are different with respect to a single particle. A collective nonmoving set of particles acts as a stationary object, yet within it each particle seems to be “bouncing” off of an imaginary wall creating pressure. Thus one has an impulse free particle picture yet obtains the correct result exp(-V(x)/T). Alternatively one may think of a single particle accelerating which it does if it is not colliding with other particles. This is a very different picture of the single particle than of one bouncing back and forth hitting an imaginary wall. In fact, there is usually a wall holding the gas together and pressure and bouncing particles are the real picture there, but within the gas one would normally think of a single particle accelerating. Nevertheless there are two scenarios which yield the same result. The idea of pressure balance is more in keeping with an overall statistical picture of the gas. In other words, one may actually ignore the idea of following a single particle as it accelerates. (That is not to say that single particle acceleration does not exist - it does.) Quantum mechanics we argue is a statistical theory. In the case of a single bound particle one has a momentum distribution W(x)=wavefunction = Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). One may apply conservation of average energy at each x to obtain the time-independent Schrodinger equation. In such a picture, like with the statistical mechanical gas, we argue that one may imagine impulse hits with the potential instead of considering acceleration. The quantity vrms(x) from KEclassical= .5m vrms(x)vrms(x) = -1/2m d/dx dW/dx / W does display acceleration, but this is a mathematical average. As energy levels become higher the correspondence principle is said to apply, but a classical particle exhibits acceleration. The quantum bound state does not, but like in the case of the statistical mechanical gas it may be that two scenarios lead to the same result. In other words, the quantum bound W(x) still has crests and troughs, but with low resolution one may only see an envelope roughly touching W(x)W(x) which matches a classical C2/v(x) where v(x) is classical velocity. Given that quantum mechanics is a statistical theory it may not be necessary to have it explicitly display acceleration.

•May 28, 2022•0 citations

Classical probability density distributions with uncertainty relations for ground states of simple non-relativistic quantum-mechanical systems

Tomasz Radożycki

The probability density distributions for the ground states of certain model systems in quantum mechanics and for their classical counterparts are considered. It is shown that classical distributions are remarkably improved by incorporating into them the Heisenberg uncertainty relation between position and momentum. Even the crude form of this incorporation makes the agreement between classical and quantum distributions unexpectedly good, except for the small area, where classical momenta are large. It is demonstrated that the slight improvement of this form makes the classical distribution very similar to the quantum one in the whole space. The obtained results are much better than those from the WKB method. The paper is devoted to ground states, but the method applies to excited states too.

arXiv:1605.08202•Molecular Physics•Sep 1, 2016•2 citations
We compare the classical and quantum mechanical position-space probability densities for a particle in an asymmetric infinite well. In an idealized system with a discontinuous step in the middle of the well, the classical and quantum probability distributions agree fairly well, even for relatively small quantum numbers, except for anomalous cases which arise due to the unphysical nature of the potential. We are able to derive upper and lower bounds on the differences between the quantum and classical results. We also qualitatively discuss the momentum-space probability densities for this system using intuitive ideas about the amount of time a classical particle spends in various parts of the well. This system provides an excellent example of a non-trivial, but tractable, quantum mechanical bound state problem where the correlations between the amplitude and curvature of quantum mechanical wavefunctions can be easily compared to classical intuition about particle motion, with quantitative success, but also warning of possible surprises in non-physical limiting cases.
After briefly reviewing the definitions of classical probability densities for position, P CL ( x ), and for momentum, P CL ( p ), we present several examples of classical mechanical potential systems, mostly variations on such familiar cases as the infinite well and the uniformly accelerated particle for which the classical distributions can be easily derived and visualized. We focus especially on a simple potential which interpolates between the symmetric linear potential, V ( x ) = F | x |, and the infinite well, which can illustrate, in a mathematically straightforward way, how the divergent δ-function classical probability density for momentum for the infinite well can be seen to arise. Such examples can help students understand the quantum mechanical momentum-space wavefunction (and its corresponding probability density) in much the same way that other semiclassical techniques, such as the WKB approximation, can be used to visualize position-space wavefunctions.
The classical and quantum probability distributions for both position and momentum are compared for several model systems admitting bound states including the harmonic oscillator, the infinite well, and the linear confining potential (V(x)=F‖x‖). Examples corresponding to unbound systems, including the uniformly accelerating particle and the motion of a particle moving away from a point of unstable equilibrium, i.e., the ‘‘unstable oscillator’’ defined by V(x)=−kx2/2, are also considered. The quantum and classical distribution of kinetic and potential energy for the harmonic oscillator is briefly discussed.
The biharmonic oscillator and the asymmetric linear well are two confining power-law-type potentials for which complete bound-state solutions are possible in both classical and quantum mechanics. We examine these problems in detail, beginning with studies of their trajectories in position and momentum space, evaluation of the classical probability densities for both x and p, and calculation of the corresponding quantum-mechanical solutions which give |?n(x)|2 and |?n(p)|2 for comparison to their classical counterparts in the?classically allowed regions. We then focus on the behavior of ?n(p) for large momenta, motivated by recent studies of the very direct connections between the continuity behavior of V(x) and the large-p limit of the momentum-space wavefunction.
We extend the standard treatment of the asymmetric infinite square well to include solutions that have zero curvature over part of the well. This type of solution, both within the specific context of the asymmetric infinite square well and within the broader context of bound states of arbitrary piecewise-constant potential energy functions, is not often discussed as part of quantum mechanics texts at any level. We begin by outlining the general mathematical condition in one-dimensional time-independent quantum mechanics for a bound-state wavefunction to have zero curvature over an extended region of space and still be a valid wavefunction. We then briefly review the standard asymmetric infinite square well solutions, focusing on zero-curvature solutions as represented by energy eigenstates in position and momentum space.
Quantum mechanics is often compared with classical mechanics because both may deal with a single particle subject to a potential. Classical mechanics is said to be deterministic describing x(t) and its derivatives i.e showing how a particle moves and accelerates while bound state quantum mechanics produces a real wavefunction W(x) such that W(x)W(x) yields a spatial density profile. The comparison is carried further with the correspondence principle which states that at high energy levels quantum mechanics should mimic classical mechanics. Classical mechanics does not simply describe x(t) and its derivatives i.e. deterministic motion. It also includes two body scattering, force and torque balances for a stationary object etc. In the case of the classical statistical mechanics of an equilibrium ideal gas, the Maxwell-Boltzmann (MB) distribution in the absence of a potential is C1 exp(- pp/(2mT) ). If a potential V(x) is added, one may find P(x) two different ways using Newtonian ideas. The first is to consider the gas as a collective entity like a tiny macroscopic classical object at x. Then one may argue that equilibrium means the system is stationary and apply Newtonian statics i.e. a balance of pressures and -dV/dx to obtain exp(-V(x)/T) as is often done in textbooks. Alternatively, one may consider a single particle and apply Newtonian mechanics differently, namely use a conservation of energy equation: p1p1/2m + V(x1) = p2p2/2m + V(x2). Again one obtains exp(-V(x)/T). The spatial part of probability may be based on Newtonian mechanics indicating that it is not stochastic. The stochastic function is C1 exp(-pp/2mT). Interestingly, however, the two Newtonian approaches are different with respect to a single particle. A collective nonmoving set of particles acts as a stationary object, yet within it each particle seems to be “bouncing” off of an imaginary wall creating pressure. Thus one has an impulse free particle picture yet obtains the correct result exp(-V(x)/T). Alternatively one may think of a single particle accelerating which it does if it is not colliding with other particles. This is a very different picture of the single particle than of one bouncing back and forth hitting an imaginary wall. In fact, there is usually a wall holding the gas together and pressure and bouncing particles are the real picture there, but within the gas one would normally think of a single particle accelerating. Nevertheless there are two scenarios which yield the same result. The idea of pressure balance is more in keeping with an overall statistical picture of the gas. In other words, one may actually ignore the idea of following a single particle as it accelerates. (That is not to say that single particle acceleration does not exist - it does.) Quantum mechanics we argue is a statistical theory. In the case of a single bound particle one has a momentum distribution W(x)=wavefunction = Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). One may apply conservation of average energy at each x to obtain the time-independent Schrodinger equation. In such a picture, like with the statistical mechanical gas, we argue that one may imagine impulse hits with the potential instead of considering acceleration. The quantity vrms(x) from KEclassical= .5m vrms(x)vrms(x) = -1/2m d/dx dW/dx / W does display acceleration, but this is a mathematical average. As energy levels become higher the correspondence principle is said to apply, but a classical particle exhibits acceleration. The quantum bound state does not, but like in the case of the statistical mechanical gas it may be that two scenarios lead to the same result. In other words, the quantum bound W(x) still has crests and troughs, but with low resolution one may only see an envelope roughly touching W(x)W(x) which matches a classical C2/v(x) where v(x) is classical velocity. Given that quantum mechanics is a statistical theory it may not be necessary to have it explicitly display acceleration.
The probability density distributions for the ground states of certain model systems in quantum mechanics and for their classical counterparts are considered. It is shown that classical distributions are remarkably improved by incorporating into them the Heisenberg uncertainty relation between position and momentum. Even the crude form of this incorporation makes the agreement between classical and quantum distributions unexpectedly good, except for the small area, where classical momenta are large. It is demonstrated that the slight improvement of this form makes the classical distribution very similar to the quantum one in the whole space. The obtained results are much better than those from the WKB method. The paper is devoted to ground states, but the method applies to excited states too.