Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- classes:2009:fall:phys4101.001:q_a_1019 [2009/10/19 11:07] – jbarthel
+++ classes:2009:fall:phys4101.001:q_a_1019 [2009/10/20 01:00] (current) – x500_santi026
@@ Line 90: / Line 90: @@
 I believe this is similar to saying that any wavefunction can be described by the linear combination of certain other wavefunctions, as described by Fourier's theorem.  In this axiom, the eigenfunctions of an observable correspond to the wavefunctions of that observable, which as we have seen in the previous chapters can indeed be described by a combination of wavefunctions.
+====Esquire 10/19 1:21pm====
+This question is not entirely pertinent to the current subject, yet it crossed my mind nonetheless. When working in the simple harmonic oscillator potential scenario, we found that energy values are increments of 1/2. Does this mean that only Fermions can be modeled with SHO?
+===chavez 10/19 6:12PM===
+The simple harmonic oscillator has energy level increments of 1. <math>E_{n} = (n + \frac{1}{2})\hbar\omega</math>
+=== Can 10/19 11:21pm ===
+I thought I understood SHO,and just like chavaz said <math>E_{n} = (n + \frac{1}{2})\hbar\omega</math>, but now I am confused,  how do you make the jump from SHO to fermions?
+=== ice IX 10/20 00:44 ===
+You are thinking of spin 1/2 for fermions, which has nothing to do with the energy value increments for the SHO; any particle can be in such a potential.
 ----------------------------------------------
 **Return to Q&A main page: [[Q_A]]**\\