• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,054 questions , 2,207 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,721 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  How integrable are solutions of the Schroedinger equation?

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

What can one say about the integrability of solutions of the time-independent Schroedinger equation $H\psi=E\psi$, where $H=p^2/2m +V(x)$, with $V(x)=W(x)^2$?

a) For bound states, $\psi$ is square integrable. Is the same true for $p\psi$? For $W(x)\psi$?

b) For scattering states? Here $\psi$ is not square integrable. What are the requirements on $\phi$ such that $\langle\phi|\psi\rangle$ exists? Is the square integrability of $H\psi$ enough? Or that of $p\psi$ and $W(x)\psi$?

Where can I find such questions discussed?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
asked Apr 20, 2012 in Theoretical Physics by Arnold Neumaier (15,787 points) [ no revision ]
Isn't this standard functional analysis material? Sorry if I'm not understanding the full thrust of the problem --- I suspect you already know this: Usually we pick a domain for $H$ which is not the whole Hilbert space but only a dense subset, and the discrete eigenvectors will be in this subset. The continuous eigenvectors will be in the dual of this subset (since they are really eigenvectors of the adjoint $H^\dagger$). So the answers to your questions are "it depends" --- specifically on the form of $V$.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Minor correction to above: the parenthetical remark "since they are really eigenvectors of the adjoint $H^\dagger$" is incorrect).

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
@genneth: It is not clear to me why the eigenvectors for the discrete spectrum have to be in the domain of $H$, or why those of the continuous spectrum are in the domain's dual. And in the latter case, I hope for somethng better. E.g., if $H=p^2/2m$ then the domain is the Sobolev space $H^2$ but the eigenvectors are already in the dual space of the space of continuous functions.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Then it seems I have missed the heart of the question. What kind of answer to "why" are you looking for? The proof of these things are textbook material, but you are looking for a more physical argument?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
@genneth: why? = references to where I can read more. Of course, indicating the (mathematical) arguments is also welcome. But I am also interested in getting to know the best possible spaces.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Good question on the references problem. I was taught by blackboard and never really used a textbook for this... quant-ph/9907069 is a short paper, and references textbooks. As far as the "best" space goes, I think that depends on application. My position is that all this is usually devoid of physical content, in that the physics will be independent of the mathematical machinery employed. In cases of ambiguity, one usually can find a completely finite truncation and take the limit carefully.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
@genneth: I know that paper; Gieres doesn't discuss the eigenvalue problem at all. But he shows the importance of getting the spaces right. That I am looking for the best spaces is of course just curiosity.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights