Lecture # 3
Module Part II – Quantum Mechanics No. of
no. lectures
7 Birth of Quantum Mechanics: particle aspect of radiation (blackbody radiation, photoelectric 3
effect, Compton effect), wave aspect of particle (de Broglie’s hypothesis, Davisson-Germer
experiment), wave-particle duality, double-slit experiment
8 Quantum Mechanical Wave Function: wave function, representation of wave function, 3
Schrödinger equation, probability density, statistical interpretation, superposition principle,
continuity equation.
9 Quantum Mechanical Operators: observables and operators, linear operators, eigenvalues and 1.5
eigen vectors of operators, Hermitian operators, product of operators, expectation values and
uncertainty relations.
10 Time-Independent Schrodinger Equation: stationary states, free particle solution, bound states 2.5
11 One Dimensional Problems: 1-D infinite potential well, 1-D finite potential well, and quantum 2
mechanical tunneling.
12 Particle in 1-D lattice, Kronig-Penney Model and the E/k Diagram. 1
1
References
➢ Quantum Mechanics Concepts and Applications, Nouredine Zettili
➢ Chapter-1, Compton Effect
➢ Chapter-1, de Broglie’s hypothesis, Davisson-Germer experiment,
Particles versus Waves
2
Summary
▪ Blackbody radiation: Planck predicted particle aspect of radiation. He hypothesized quantized energy
scale of harmonic oscillators.
▪ Photoelectric effect: Einstein used photon picture of light to explain photoelectric effect. Further, he
predicted kinetic energy of photoelectrons. Millikan later proved Einstein’s theory.
3
Compton scattering (1923)
▪ Compton scattering offers the most convincing proof of the particle nature of wave
▪ This is about how highly-energetic x-ray scatters off the free electrons.
▪ Energy-scale of x-ray is in the order of ~1 keV. Whereas, binding energy of electrons in metals is in the
order of ~10 eV. So, the electrons in metals are almost free in front of the highly energetic x-ray.
Q. What does classical physics tell us about this scattering ?
Thompson scattering:
→ The electron will oscillate following the oscillatory electric
field in the x-ray wave.
→ Frequency of the electron oscillation will be exactly the
frequency of the x-ray wave.
→ As a result, oscillating electron will emit radiation with ▪ In reality, Δ𝜆 ≠ 0
same frequency as of the incident x-ray radiation. → Classical physics fails when x-ray is
Δ𝜆 = 𝜆𝑓 − 𝜆𝑖 = 0 treated as a wave 4
Compton scattering (continuing)
▪ Compton assumes particle nature of x-ray wave
𝐸 = ℎ𝜐
▪ It is an inelastic scattering process → Linear
momentum and total energy before and after
collision are conserved
▪ We have to invoke relativistic energy expression for
this problem
𝑚0 𝑐 2 𝑚0 = 0 → Rest mass of photon
𝐸=
𝑉2
1− 2 𝐸= 𝑝2 𝑐 2 + 0
𝑐
𝐸= 𝑝2 𝑐 2 + 𝑚02 𝑐 4 𝐸 = 𝑝𝑐
𝑚0 𝑉
𝑝Ԧ = 𝐸 ℎ𝜐 ℎ𝜐 ℎ
𝑉2 𝑝= = = =
1− 𝑐 𝑐 𝜐𝜆 𝜆
𝑐2 5
Compton scattering (continuing) 𝑃𝑒 =?
𝐸𝑒 =?
▪ Conservation of momentum
ℎ𝜐
𝑝Ԧ𝑖 + 𝑃𝑖 = 𝑝Ԧ𝑓 + 𝑃𝑒 𝑝𝑖 =
𝑐
𝐸𝑖 = ℎ𝜐 𝑃𝑖 = 0
𝑃𝑒 = 𝑝Ԧ𝑖 −𝑝Ԧ𝑓
𝐸0 = 𝑚𝑒 𝑐 2
▪ Energy of electron after collision
𝐸𝑒 = 𝑃𝑒2 𝑐 4 + 𝑚𝑒2 𝑐 4
ℎ𝜐𝑓
𝑝𝑓 =
𝑐
▪ Conservation of total energy ▪ Finally we get
𝐸𝑓 = ℎ𝜐𝑓
𝐸𝑖 + 𝐸0 = 𝐸𝑓 + 𝐸𝑒 ℎ
Δ𝜆 = 𝜆𝑓 − 𝜆𝑖 = 1 − cos 𝜃
𝑚𝑒 𝑐
ℎ
→ Compton wavelength of the electron
𝑚𝑒 𝑐
6
Compton scattering (continuing)
ℎ
Δ𝜆 = 𝜆𝑓 − 𝜆𝑖 = 1 − cos 𝜃
𝑚𝑒 𝑐
▪ Determination of Compton wavelength
ℎ ℏ𝑐 = 197 MeV.fm
𝑚𝑒 𝑐
𝑚𝑒 𝑐 2 = 511 × 103 eV
2𝜋 ℎ
=
𝑚𝑒 𝑐 2𝜋
ℏ
= 2𝜋
𝑚𝑒 𝑐
ℏ𝑐 197 MeV. fm
= 2𝜋 2
= 2𝜋 3
= 0.0024 nm
𝑚𝑒 𝑐 511 × 10 eV
7
Compton scattering (continuing)
Intensity
Let’s do an experiment …
Metal block
Detector 𝜆
𝜃 = 90 o 𝜆1 𝜆2
= 0.0709 nm
= 0.0731 nm
▪ Which one is the Compton scattered wavelength ?
𝜆2
Let’s see …
X-ray source (Molybdenum) 𝜆2 − 𝜆 = 0.0731 − 0.0709 nm = 0.0022 nm
𝜆 = 0.0709 nm ℎ ℎ
Δ𝜆 = 𝜆𝑓 − 𝜆𝑖 = 1 − cos 𝜃 = At 𝜃 = 90o
𝑚𝑒 𝑐 𝑚𝑒 𝑐
𝐸 = 17.49 keV
= 0.0024 nm 8
Louis de Broglie’s hypothesis (1923)
▪ What we know for light ? ▪ de Broglie’s hypothesis
Like electromagnetic radiation, all material particles
→ Light is an electromagnetic wave also display a dual wave-particle behavior. Each
→ Light also behaves like particles. These moving material particle is represented by a plane
wave with the following wavelength (𝜆) and wave
particles are known as photons. vector (𝑘).
→ So, light has a dual character: light is both ℎ 𝑝Ԧ
𝜆= & 𝑘=
wave and particle 𝑝 ℏ
𝐸= 𝑝2 𝑐 2 + 𝑚02 𝑐 4 ▪ Note
In case of light, the wave consists of oscillatory
𝑚0 = 0 → Rest mass of photon electric and magnetic fields. But, de Broglie
hypothesized matter wave in case of material
𝐸= 𝑝2 𝑐 2 + 0 particles.
𝐸 = 𝑝𝑐 → The matter wave is nothing but the oscillatory
𝐸 ℎ𝜐 ℎ𝜐 ℎ probability of finding the material particles.
𝑝= = = =
𝑐 𝑐 𝜐𝜆 𝜆 9
Matter wave for a microscopic object
▪ Calculate de Broglie wavelength for a proton with kinetic energy of 70 MeV.
Kinetic energy, 𝑇 = 70 MeV ℎ
𝜆= ℏ𝑐 ≈ 197 MeV.fm
𝑝
1
𝑇= 𝑚𝑣 2 𝑝 = 𝑚𝑣 ℎ 1
𝑚𝑐 2 = 938.3 MeV
2 = 2𝜋
2𝜋 𝑝 𝑚 = 1.673 × 10−27 kg
2 𝑝
1 𝑝 𝑣=
= 𝑚 𝑚 ℏ𝑐
2 𝑚
= 2𝜋
𝑝𝑐
𝑝2
= ℏ𝑐
2𝑚
= 2𝜋
2𝑚𝑇𝑐 2
𝑝 = 2𝑚𝑇
197
= 2𝜋 fm = 3.4 × 10−15 m
2 × 938.3 × 70
Note that the radius of proton → 0.831 × 10−15 m 10
Matter wave for a macroscopic object
▪ Calculate de Broglie wavelength of a 100 g tennis ball travelling at 900 m/sec
ℎ ℎ 6.626 × 10−34 J. s −36 m
𝜆= = = = 7.4 × 10
𝑝 𝑚𝑣 0.1 kg × 900 m. s −1
Typical radius of a tennis ball → 0.03 m
→ For macroscopic objects, particle nature dominates due to infinitesimal de Broglie wavelength
11
Experimental proof of de Broglie’s hypothesis
▪ We have to prove experimentally that particle has wave characteristic
→ particles give rise to interference
▪ Let’s go to the solid state physics and investigate Bragg’s law.
Ray #1 → Path difference between ray #1 and ray #2 is: 2𝑑 sin 𝜃
𝜆
X-ray → Constructive interference happens when
Ray #2 2𝑑 sin 𝜃 = 𝑛𝜆
𝑛 = 1, 2, 3 …
12
Experimental proof of de Broglie’s hypothesis (continuing)
▪ Davisson-Germer experiment (1927) ▪ What we should expect classically?
→ As long as we keep the incident and scattering angles
54 eV same, we should expect uniform scattered intensity of
electrons.
▪ What do we actually observe?
→ Scattered electron intensity is not uniform. It is
𝜙/2 𝜙/2
maximum when 𝜙 = 50o.
𝜃 𝜃 → Such intensity distribution does not change, even when
we reduce the incoming intensity of electrons, let’s say
one at a time
▪ Is not our observation strange?
→ Such an angle-dependent intensity distribution we
observe in case of x-ray diffraction, where x-ray follows
Bragg’s law. However, x-ray is a wave, but electron is a
particle
13
Experimental proof of de Broglie’s hypothesis (continuing)
▪ For fun, let’s apply Bragg’s law 54 eV
2𝑑 sin 𝜃 = 𝑛𝜆
→ The strongest diffraction is the first-order, so 𝑛 = 1
𝜙/2 𝜙/2
𝜆 = 2𝑑 sin 𝜃 𝜃 𝜃
For Ni, 𝑑 = 0.091 nm
Maximum intensity at ∅ = 50o
180o − 50o
𝜃= = 65o
2
𝜆 = 2 × 0.091 × sin 65o nm
𝝀 = 𝟎. 𝟏𝟔𝟓 𝐧𝐦
14
Experimental proof of de Broglie’s hypothesis (continuing)
▪ Bragg’s law found the wavelength of electrons as 𝝀 = 𝟎. 𝟏𝟔𝟓 𝐧𝐦
▪ What does de Broglie’s hypothesis predict?
▪ Thus, we prove that
→ Electrons behave like wave inside crystals
ℎ ℏ ℏ𝑐 ℏ𝑐 𝑝2
𝜆 = = 2𝜋 = 2𝜋 = 2𝜋 𝑇= → de Broglie’s hypothesis is correct
𝑝 𝑝 𝑝𝑐 2𝑇𝑚𝑐 2 2𝑚
ℏ𝑐 = 197 MeV.fm
𝑚𝑐 2 = 511 × 10−3 MeV → Rest mass of electron
𝑇 = 54 eV
𝝀 = 𝟎. 𝟏𝟔𝟕 nm → This is exactly what Bragg’s law determined
15
Questions
▪ Can we observe maximum electron intensity at
∅ = 𝟓𝟎o if the kinetic energy of electrons is not 54
eV?
𝜙/2 𝜙/2
𝜃 𝜃
▪ Did you notice something strange in Davisson-
Germer experiment?
→ We are ejecting electrons to the Ni crystal as particles
→ We are detecting scattered electron as particles
→ However, electrons behave like wave inside the Ni crystal
Wave-particle duality?
16
