8 ms·
If this is supposed to be the probability density then it looks way off. I suspect that there is a mistake in calculating the absolute value of the wave functio
by steerablesafe 6y ago
If this is supposed to be the probability density then it looks way off. I suspect that there is a mistake in calculating the absolute value of the wave function.
Edit: In this base the absolute value of the wave function is supposed to be rotational symmetric around the z axis.
- raverbashing 6y agoWhy? The PDE should be Psi^2 no? (which is what it's being plotted) > In this base the absolute value of the wave function is supposed to be rotational symmetric around the z axis. For the D orbital?
- evanb 6y agoIf the wavefunction is supposed to have n,l,m quantum numbers (as suggested by the interface) then yes, it should be rotationally symmetric around the z axis.
- steerablesafe 6y agoThe phi-dependence of the wave-functions are exp(i m phi), it has magnitude 1. |Psi|^2 = conj(Psi)*Psi, the phi-dependency cancels out.
- Denvercoder9 6y agoYes, judging from a quick look at the code (and not being familiar with the GiNaC library used) this seems to square the wave function instead of squaring the absolute value. [1] https://github.com/c0nrad/hydrogen/blob/master/hydrogen.cpp#L205 https://github.com/c0nrad/hydrogen/blob/master/hydrogen.cpp#...
- ssivark 6y agoAt a first glance, there seems to be something wonky with the quantum numbers: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/qunoh.html http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/qunoh.html