Actually the solution is Phi = -(1/12)*m^4 + C1*m + C2 , where C1 and C2 are arbitary constants. How did you get a complex term for a solution?Can someone explain to me why the solution of is ?
Ratch, you misread the question. The derivatives are with respect to \( \phi \), not with respect to \( m_l \). You may have been thrown off by the typo in the equation.boks,
Actually the solution is Phi = -(1/12)*m^4 + C1*m + C2 , where C1 and C2 are arbitary constants. How did you get a complex term for a solution?
Ratch
So what is ml, a constant? And what is the correct equation? I still don't see a sinusoid in the solution.Ratch, you misread the question. The derivatives are with respect to , not with respect to . You may have been thrown off by the typo in the equation.
Yes, my wife and I went to Hot Springs, Arkansas.That must have been a good vacation you took!
This equation shows up in the quantum mechanical solution for the hydrogen atom, and \( m_l \) is the magnetic quantum number. There is a typo in the way boks wrote it, but it was clear from the context what he meant. One issue is the proper amplitude for the solution. There is a customary way to normalize the solution, but I assumed that was not the sticking point.steveb,
So what is ml, a constant? And what is the correct equation? I still don't see a sinusoid in the solution.
Ratch
Based on the problem that was posted, Ratch's solution was a lot closer than the one the OP provided.Ratch, you misread the question. The derivatives are with respect to \( \phi \), not with respect to \( m_l \). You may have been thrown off by the typo in the equation.
That must have been a good vacation you took!![]()
Well, I would say your answer is the correct answer based on the exact equation posted. It's a matter of judgement whether ratch or the OP is closer. Technically they are both wrong.Based on the problem that was posted, Ratch's solution was a lot closer than the one the OP provided.
For the given problem, I get
\(\Phi = \frac{-m^2\phi ^2}{2} + C\phi + D\)
SteveB, you mentioned that boks had a typo in the equation he posted. My guess is that the correct DE was missing a factor of \(\Phi \) on the right side, like so:
\(\frac{d^2 \Phi}{d\phi ^2 } = -m^2 \Phi\)
If d2(Phi)/phi = -m^2*Phi , then the solution is Phi = A*cos(m*phi) + (B/m)*sin(m*phi)you mentioned that boks had a typo in the equation he posted. My guess is that the correct DE was missing a factor of on the right side, like so: d2(Phi)/phi = -m^2*Phi
Nope, it's not. Two can play at this pedantic game.Mark44,
If d2(Phi)/phi = -m^2*Phi , then the solution is Phi = A*cos(m*phi) + (B/m)*sin(m*phi)
Ratch
Oh yes it is. Our solutions are equivalent. Your "A" is what I designate as "B/m" and your "B" is what I designate as A. They are all constants, albeit different constants. Each solution's double derivative equates to -m^2*Phi . I will admit that your expression of the solution looks nicer.Nope, it's not.
Would you be so kind as to give me a quick example. Make A and B any nontrivial value, and show the equivalency of the exponential sums.In addition, the linear combination of cosine and sine of the solution can also be written as a linear combination of exponential functions (of ), similar to what boks originally posted.
I'll take your word for the equivalence of our solutions. For an example,Mark44,
Oh yes it is. Our solutions are equivalent. Your "A" is what I designate as "B/m" and your "B" is what I designate as A. They are all constants, albeit different constants. Each solution's double derivative equates to -m^2*Phi . I will admit that your expression of the solution looks nicer.
Would you be so kind as to give me a quick example. Make A and B any nontrivial value, and show the equivalency of the exponential sums.
Ratch