Go Back   Science Forums Biology Forum Molecular Biology Forum Physics Chemistry Forum > General Science Forums > Physics Forum
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Physics Forum Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Transfer matrix method

Transfer matrix method - Physics Forum

Transfer matrix method - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-14-2004, 01:49 PM
N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Transfer matrix method



cross-posting to sci.engr.mech

"Steve Ralph" <[Only registered users see links. ].uk> wrote in message
news:416e5aaf$0$59465$[Only registered users see links. ].net...


Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-18-2004, 06:19 PM
Steve Ralph
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Transfer matrix method


"N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" <N: dlzc1 D:cox T:[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in
message news:itvbd.898$SW3.490@fed1read01...




Yes, the ends have to join up, no problems there-

I have equations of the type

phi1(x) = Ae^ik1x + Be^-ik1x (x<0)
C D (0<=x<=a)
E F (a<=x)

A,B etc are billed as arbitrary constants, which is very nice but
nowhere can I find any suggestions as how to choose them, which
implies I am missing the glaringly obvious. The math I have here
indicates that I only need A and F to get my transmission function out.

Steve Ralph







Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-19-2004, 01:31 PM
tadchem
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Transfer matrix method

"Steve Ralph" <[Only registered users see links. ].uk> wrote in message news:<41740912$0$48002$[Only registered users see links. ].net>...

<snip>


The 'open ended' ranges are one key here: To be integrable, the
functions cannot grow without limit as one moves out into the open
range. This constrains both B and E to identically zero.

Another 'trick' is node counting: a node is a point where the wave
function vanishes. If C and D are of the same sign, there can be no
node in the interval 0<=x<=a, and because you have only one
coefficient in the unbounded open ranges, there can be no nodes there.
If they have opposite signs, then there will be a point at which they
will cancel each other out, producing a node.

The symmetry of the problem also tells us that |C| = |D|.

Result: you will have a node at x=a/2 when C = -D and no node when C =
+D. (The wave function *with* the node will have a higher energy.)

You now have only to integrate the two piece-wise wave functions (one
wothout the node and one with the node) and normalize the results to
evaluate the two unknowns: A = +/-F and C = +/-D, where the - sign
applies to the wave function with the node.

Try it now and let me know how it goes.


Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-19-2004, 06:44 PM
Steve Ralph
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Transfer matrix method


"tadchem" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:130fe1c3.0410190531.48317602@posting.google.c om...
<snip>
Speaking of nodes, the document I'm working from is
[Only registered users see links. ]
which is about the only description of the basic method I've managed to find
so far.
I've realised WKB looses resonances, which is no good - I'm very
much in instant cookbook mode at the moment :>)) I think it's finally
clicked that
I have expressions for d12 p2 etc in (17) so the top row of that 2x2 matrix
multiplication gives t11.
I'm starting to get my head round whats happening here, so thanks for some
most useful comments!
Doutless I'll be back in a day or so when I end up with infinite tunnelling
or
something equally silly

SR



Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-19-2004, 11:11 PM
Steve Ralph
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Transfer matrix method

Thanx again. I graduated in physics in '76, and then got my doc in
turbulent combustion flow measurement. I had to struggle to get an equation
in
there at all :>)) It is something of a shock to find myself with my
trusty PC doing QM! It is like banging the rust off pipes.
All of a sudden the math sort of came into focus, (comments
from Tadchem and N:dlx wotsit helped ) so
feeling a lot more competent (until the next obstacle) its down to ordinary
programming and countering my tendancy to make dumb mistakes now. I
just hope I can put E = Vmax and get 1, and E=Vmax=0 and get 0. (fat
chance :>))

This is real fun. As an experimentalist I never expected to get involved in
theoretical work, let alone get to see new territory. (Provided I can get
my arithmetic right of course LOL)

Steve Ralph





Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
matrix , method , transfer


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Orthogonal Matrix method for optimization of Culture conditions baccilus Basic Lab Protocols and Techniques 0 09-25-2008 06:06 AM
Functions of Matrices uft000@gmail.com Physics Forum 1 11-01-2006 12:31 AM
transfer matrix - complex numbers? Steve Ralph Physics Forum 8 10-22-2004 10:05 AM
Transfer matrix method tadchem Physics Forum 0 10-14-2004 03:31 PM
New Saccharomyces Sequences 09/08/04 SGD Sequences Yeast Forum 0 09-13-2004 10:07 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Molecular Station | All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.14294 seconds with 16 queries