SCHRÖDINGER'S EQUATION (Derivation) - Plausibility Argument & Time-Independent SE Derivation

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 95

  • @FortheLoveofPhysics
    @FortheLoveofPhysics  ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Happy New Year Everyone! Our CSIR-NET/GATE Physical Sciences LIVE Masterclass JUNE-2024 Batch is starting January 21. If you want to join, Register at www.elevateclasses.in/
    5% EARLYBIRD Discount Coupon available for the first 50 Students before JAN 21. Cheers!
    Android APP: bit.ly/3zU71ur
    iOS APP: apple.co/3ZPRWVJ (Code-AHGXS)

    • @p.m.rangarajan1055
      @p.m.rangarajan1055 ปีที่แล้ว

      Sir, however clearer the lecture is, QM is still a fuzzy subject. Your dedication in clearing the smallest piece of information on QM is really praiseworthy. I was captivated by your presentation. Thanks for your effort.

  • @r.murphy2311
    @r.murphy2311 ปีที่แล้ว +21

    Another spectacular lecture! You are able to achieve in 55 mins what most instructors cannot in an entire semester.

  • @zahidwali9319
    @zahidwali9319 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Your lectures are a captivating journey through the landscape of knowledge. Your passion illuminates each topic, making even the most complex subjects feel approachable. Thank you for making learning such a delightful experience!
    ❤❤

  • @Tom-sp3gy
    @Tom-sp3gy ปีที่แล้ว +10

    Brilliant ! Great lecture ! What a way to begin the New Year! Love you so much sir… you are India’s Richard Feynman !

  • @jash5586
    @jash5586 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Probably my first and only comment on any video. This video shows one of the most complex and difficult equation in such a manner that no other teacher has been able to show me till now. Really great video sir Thank you so much

  • @Gazrul-j6g
    @Gazrul-j6g หลายเดือนก่อน

    I really love the way you taught. I am very much interested in quantum mechanics but my engineering physics professor never taught me in the way you taught, so I started to hate quantum mechanics and now I regret not discovering your channel early on.. BTW thanks because tomorrow is my exam and you made me understand the schrodinger's equation instead of byhearting it. Tomorrow I can just get into the exam hall and can build the equation from scratch all by myself. Thank you

  • @delta1996
    @delta1996 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    OMG, you`re a genius!!, love your lectures.

  • @KibalatsiEmmanuel-ty1bq
    @KibalatsiEmmanuel-ty1bq 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks for the lecture. i need not even attend the class lectures now am with you to the end....🙏🙏🙏

  • @jacobvandijk6525
    @jacobvandijk6525 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Well, a good start to the new year. Your QM-viewers really had to be patient.

  • @kentykatele4353
    @kentykatele4353 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you for the content. I have been studying physics recently as if am at the University. 😅
    Please keep it up and make sure we cover all that which is supposed to be covered in quantum without skipping anything

  • @pete4416
    @pete4416 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks so much, you're saving my semester:)

  • @DeltaH-9
    @DeltaH-9 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I love your content, sir. Happy New Year!

  • @nganingkhuihas
    @nganingkhuihas 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The Best And Best explanation ever❤

  • @anishghatak2270
    @anishghatak2270 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks Sir For Give Us This Type Of Concept... Quantum Mechanics...Books Are Good But when You teaching this type of Lecture ....We Are able To Understand the actual Meaning Of This lines ..Thanks Sir ... For this Kind of lecture ...we Need More ..about Degeneracy,Parity and Liniar Harmonic ossilator Sol ...A lot of things We have To learn From You....Thaku Sir

  • @KodandaRamGanta
    @KodandaRamGanta 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Best lecture in my life ❤

  • @mohsinshah6857
    @mohsinshah6857 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Excellent topic...

  • @hananabilatanjung1237
    @hananabilatanjung1237 หลายเดือนก่อน

    thank you, Sir! What a great lecture!

  • @AbdallaDaaMadowe-kn4jq
    @AbdallaDaaMadowe-kn4jq ปีที่แล้ว

    Good day That I have waiting a long time
    Good teacher 🎉❤

  • @someshmukherjee6429
    @someshmukherjee6429 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Very nice explanation sir😊

  • @aseeker2559
    @aseeker2559 14 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา

    1:24 what is the difference between a derivation and "a set of arguments that can be used to come up with the Scrodinger equation".

    • @FortheLoveofPhysics
      @FortheLoveofPhysics  41 นาทีที่ผ่านมา

      Derivation involves deriving something (equation/statement) from some deeper, more fundamental principles of a subject. In QM, there is nothing more fundamental than the SE, so it cannot be derived from something else. Instead, he SE represents the fundamental equation from where everything else comes from.

  • @harshtiwari7395
    @harshtiwari7395 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Another mind blowing derivation sir ..... I love the way you teach the way you explain things your videos are helping me soo much thankyou soo much sir.....
    .
    Can you please tell sir that we'll also do .
    1. ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY
    2. MOLECULAR SPECTROSCOPY

  • @niharagrawal7613
    @niharagrawal7613 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    very well explained super interesting way

  • @usmanphysics6192
    @usmanphysics6192 ปีที่แล้ว

    Great lecture. Excellent 👌👌👌

  • @anirbande2234
    @anirbande2234 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir, Thank you for your constant effort. Could you please make problem solving videos or suggest or attatch problem list with the answer key on the corresponding topics? It is a big request to you. Your video lectures are outstanding but with some problems, I think it will be more helpful to the students like me.

  • @fredericopires7659
    @fredericopires7659 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Very good. Thank you soo much!!

  • @Motivationeditz-success
    @Motivationeditz-success 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    thanks for such explaination

  • @ShivamTiwary-k4q
    @ShivamTiwary-k4q 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    i am shivam from iit dh. sir its very useful to me and my friends thankss sir

  • @pipinstallpycaret4056
    @pipinstallpycaret4056 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you very much sir it helps me a lot.

  • @antoniocarlosgirodo4506
    @antoniocarlosgirodo4506 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    xcelent class!

  • @mohitz_111
    @mohitz_111 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Loved it

  • @sarthakgirdhar2833
    @sarthakgirdhar2833 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hello sir. Your student Sarthak here.
    Even though the plausibility argument does make sense, given that plane waves form a basis for all square integrable functions, I think one important point to emphasize here is the induction of time translation by the Hamiltonian.
    In classical mechanics, the Hamiltonian translates the system in time using Poisson brackets. For Schroedinger, time translation using the Hamiltonian was one of the key factors in writing down his equation. Given the fact that we need the time evolution operator to be unitary, since the Hamiltonian is hermitian, the imaginary number i has to automatically enter the formalism.
    As you most likely know already, things don't stop here. In further frameworks such as quantum field theory, this is one of the key starting points for writing down the equations of motion, such as the Klein-Gordon or the Dirac equations.

    • @FortheLoveofPhysics
      @FortheLoveofPhysics  ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Hi Sarthak, nice to hear from you. Hope you are doing well. Good point. I chose the plausibility argument as it's the simplest argument to point to The Equation (although Schrodinger himself chose a different path). Given the sequence in which I am introducing these ideas, i have to be careful that I keep the lectures simple. It's one of the demerits about being a teacher - I need to hold the student's hand and lead them step by step.

    • @sarthakgirdhar2833
      @sarthakgirdhar2833 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@FortheLoveofPhysics Hello sir. Yes I am fine. Yes I agree!

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You don't need a plausibility argument. We can derive quantum mechanics directly from Kolmogorov's axioms and relativity. The Schroedinger equation then pops out as a non-relativistic limit of Dirac or gauge field theories. Schroedinger didn't know any of this. He simply guessed correctly. In today's world, however, a teacher who makes handwaving arguments like this simply shows that he hasn't read the modern primary literature.

    • @sarthakgirdhar2833
      @sarthakgirdhar2833 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@lepidoptera9337 For teaching undergraduates entering their sophomore year, talking about gauge field theories is not likely to play well. By this logic you should start with Peskin and Schroeder's QFT right from the start and derive everything in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics by taking the appropriate limits. Why not even derive classical mechanics by setting hbar=0 everywhere? Surely that is going to help you study rolling cylinders on inclined planes.

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@sarthakgirdhar2833 We don't need gauge field theory to explain the basics of quantum mechanics correctly but the problem is that non-relativistic QM is "miraculous" in a number of ways. The tensor-product structure, for instance, is a direct result of relativity. It does not drop out of a non-relativistic derivation. Neither do important details like fully symmetric bosonic and fully anti-symmetric fermionic wave functions. These require (dimension dependent!) representations of the Poincare group. So in effect we can't even derive enough quantum mechanics with handwaving to get to the periodic table of elements. The buck basically stops at hydrogen. To teach QM to undergrads all the way to Schroedinger and no further produces only one thing: another generation of physicists who do not understand 20th century physics at all. These physicists will then teach another generation of students who will also not understand physics. It's a vicious cycle that we have been playing since the 1930s. Enough already.

  • @mazharali5348
    @mazharali5348 ปีที่แล้ว

    Happy new year sir

  • @sakilhabibsardar4476
    @sakilhabibsardar4476 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Sir You are awesome

  • @kevconn441
    @kevconn441 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hi Proff, Happy New Year and thanks for all your fantastic vids. Looking forward to learning loads more in 2024 on your channel.
    Can I ask about a small point someone mentioned to me not so long ago regarding the wave equation.
    The WE has a second derivative on both sides. Whereas the SE has a 1st derivative on the left and a 2nd on the right.
    It is, in fact, similar to the Heat Equation. Which makes a bit of sense considering the HE is about dispersion over time and that is what solutions of the SE looks like.

  • @anasfarid2492
    @anasfarid2492 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you very very much sir

  • @rishisingh3923
    @rishisingh3923 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    30:39 where is the - sign gone?

  • @swapnilbanerjee1796
    @swapnilbanerjee1796 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great but plz upload applications of Schrodinger eqn like partuclein a 1D box

  • @hakanegne
    @hakanegne 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    how can Schrodinger equation be applied for protons?

  • @SudhanshuSharmanitdelhi
    @SudhanshuSharmanitdelhi 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    sir please provide notes of this lecture very important

  • @domgesh392
    @domgesh392 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    sir please videos ki frequency inc. kardo

  • @payalm2538
    @payalm2538 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    sir plz make a video on perturbation theory

  • @GUNALANM-k5n
    @GUNALANM-k5n ปีที่แล้ว

    Great thanks

  • @hozeluii1566
    @hozeluii1566 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Excelent!!

  • @BiswajitDas-fj5gp
    @BiswajitDas-fj5gp ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks🙏

  • @Trivinkr
    @Trivinkr ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir , when are you going to launch the batch for IIT-JAM/ CUET-PG 2025

  • @rishukumar7158-h1w
    @rishukumar7158-h1w 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    26:12 conditions .

  • @rglennon6872
    @rglennon6872 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Isn’t the SE parabolic?

  • @rishukumar7158-h1w
    @rishukumar7158-h1w 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    52:28

  • @umarhashmi6759
    @umarhashmi6759 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Hello Sir......
    Kkesy hain app ????
    I'm from Pakistan and watch your vudeos daily....
    Sir kindly Statistical mechanics py aik lecture series kindly
    Allah Bless you with a healthy and comfortable life.

  • @farhanmajeed862
    @farhanmajeed862 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Salam sir..... Plz is topic sy on word notes to update krden plz.... We are waiting anxiously.... Love from Pakistan

  • @cesars.semp.3119
    @cesars.semp.3119 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    In words, without formulae: put yourself in the system of reference where the electron is at rest AFTER the absorption. The energy is only the rest energy. Now, from this system, BEFORE the absorption there is a photon, with positive energy, and surely some kinetical energy of the electron, also positive (or zero, but no negative).. Energy is not conserved. As you see, with no formulae, only words, and knowing that those energies are positive. Choose your system of reference well and you will save a lot of calculations.

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The Schroedinger equations says absolutely nothing about either electrons or photons. If you want to get to that level you have to quantize electromagnetism and construct a gauge field theory.

    • @cesars.semp.3119
      @cesars.semp.3119 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@lepidoptera9337 misplaced video. Sorry.

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@cesars.semp.3119 OK, that makes sense. ;-)

  • @11ankushsangwan76
    @11ankushsangwan76 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Kha P hongi online classes

  • @rishukumar7158-h1w
    @rishukumar7158-h1w 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    49:15

  • @زينالعابدينماجدمحمد
    @زينالعابدينماجدمحمد ปีที่แล้ว +1

    ❤❤❤❤

  • @englishforfunandcompetitio248
    @englishforfunandcompetitio248 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Dinger.... Like Finger....not like danger.....so Schroedinger's Equation.

  • @hectorrajclaudius2562
    @hectorrajclaudius2562 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    If physicists are able to capture the movements of the electron in an attosecond then it should pose a threat to the uncertainity principle to some extend. Should the fundamental premise of the uncertainity principle be modified in a quantifiable way?. Please post an educative video on the significance of the 2023 Nobel Prize winning work in Physics and its impact on the physicist's understanding of the fundamental tenet of quantum mechanics.

    • @FortheLoveofPhysics
      @FortheLoveofPhysics  ปีที่แล้ว +8

      It does not pose a threat to the Uncertainty Principle, as even in Attosecond timescales, we can only get an idea about the change in the probability distribution of the electron-wave, and never pin point the exact "particle" nature of the electron. Nobel Laureate Anne L'Huillier herself mentioned during press release, that their work doesnot impact the HUP. I made a video on Attosecond Physics on my second channel th-cam.com/video/4OxDs9vjdcA/w-d-xo.html

    • @hectorrajclaudius2562
      @hectorrajclaudius2562 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@FortheLoveofPhysics Thank You, Sir.

    • @gok_dogan
      @gok_dogan ปีที่แล้ว +2

      To understand HUP
      I recommend you to understand deeply how fourier transform come to life .
      If you succeed to understand what's the intuitive behind the fourier transform. Then you come across the wave behavior of the particle and try to define its mathematical formula wave-particle model . 💡 Then you find yourself in the middle of the Fourier transform reality. Once you come here 😊 you have to choose red or blue pill.
      If you choose a specific k( which is wavenumber) means a you can't define exactly the momentum of the particle. It's weird like the particle itself.

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Electrons don't move. They are quanta of energy of a quantum field.

    • @zemm9003
      @zemm9003 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The problem of the uncertainty principle is that it is formulated in a non-invariant way. So it is wrong, but the formulation that is commonly used, not the idea itself. The uncertainty principle tells us that some pairs of quantities are not properly defined, only the product of both (in some sense) matters, it is a physical limitation and not an experimental one.

  • @Cerussite-ub3kw
    @Cerussite-ub3kw หลายเดือนก่อน

    The ending lol

  • @_SAYF_
    @_SAYF_ หลายเดือนก่อน

    Im beyond cooked😢

  • @rahulkumar-zm6rz
    @rahulkumar-zm6rz 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    ❤❤❤👌👌👌👌👌👌

  • @lowersaxon
    @lowersaxon ปีที่แล้ว +10

    „Schrödinger‘s (resp. Schroedinger’s*) equation“ or „the Schrödinger equation.“ But never „the Schrödinger’s equation“. You cannot put a „the“ here. His name is n o t Schrödinger‘s , that would be written Schrödingers. His name is Schrödinger.
    So it would be „Das’ equation“ or „the Das equation“ but not „the Das’ equation“. Thats incorrect. Just said, sorry.
    * For those who dont have ö on their keyboard, doesnt exist in English, but is common in German and e.g. Turkish, Schroedinger was Austrian and in Austria the official language is German.

    • @FortheLoveofPhysics
      @FortheLoveofPhysics  ปีที่แล้ว +26

      Noted. Kindly forgive my linguistic deficiencies 🙏

    • @emkopspot
      @emkopspot 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +20

      Focus on lecture not on name 😂😂

    • @devanshdewan2597
      @devanshdewan2597 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      theeke bhai tu khush reh

    • @zazlari5601
      @zazlari5601 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      We don't care...

    • @LoveLauwsPawuwls
      @LoveLauwsPawuwls หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Who cares

  • @Chauhan0105
    @Chauhan0105 9 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Thank you very much sir 🙏🙏🙏

  • @Arhankhan0786k
    @Arhankhan0786k ปีที่แล้ว

    ❤❤