Skip to main content

Full text of "Hydrogen atom as an eigenvalue problem in 3D spaces of constant curvature and minimal length"

See other formats


Mod. Phys. Lett. A 14 (35) (1999) 2463-2469 |quant-ph/9911010| v3] 

To understand hydrogen is to understand all of physics 
in "The Yin and Yang of Hydrogen", D. Kleppner, Phys. Today, April 1999, pp. 11-12 



HYDROGEN ATOM AS AN EIGENVALUE PROBLEM IN 3D 
SPACES OF CONSTANT CURVATURE AND MINIMAL LENGTH 



L.M. NIETO 1 , H.C. ROSU 2 , M. SANTANDER 1 
1. Departamento de Fisica Teorica, Universidad de Valladolid, 47011 Valladolid, Spain 
2. Instituto de Fisica, Universidad de Guanajuato, Apdo Postal E-143, 37150 Leon, Gto, Mexico 



An old result of A.F. Stevenson [Phys. Rev. 59, 842 (1941)] concerning the Kepler- 
Coulomb quantum problem on the three-dimensional (3D) hypersphere is considered 
from the perspective of the radial Schrodinger equations on 3D spaces of any (either 
positive, zero or negative) constant curvature. Further to Stevenson, we show in detail 
how to get the hypergcomctric wavcfunction for the hydrogen atom case. Finally, we 
make a comparison between the "space curvature" effects and minimal length effects for 
the hydrogen spectrum. 

1. Ever since Schrodinger first considered the hydrogen atom in the 3D hyper- 
sphere, the 3D space of constant positive curvature,™ quantum mechanics in curved 
spaces has been of strong interest due to possible astrophysical and cosmological 
applications.EI 

The aim of this work is to present a discussion of the radial Schrodinger problem 
in 3D spaces of constant curvature (either positive, zero or negative) including ex- 
plicitly the curvature parameter in the formalism, thus being more general from the 
mathematical standpoint than any study previously done and entailing early works 
as particular cases. In the final part of the work we discuss possible fundamental 
length effects and provide a comparison with the constant curvature one. 

2. We start by recalling the famous result of Schrodinger, El who showed by his 
factorization method that in a 3D hypersphere (the 3D space of constant positive 
curvature K = 1/R 2 ), the eigenspectra of the Kepler-Coulomb potential described 
by the radial potential V(r) = — e 2 /(i?tan(r/i?)) was given by: 



Received (August 18, 1999) 
Revised (November 3, 1999) 




(1) 



2 L.M. Nieto, H.C. Rosu, M. Santander 



where B is Rydberg's constant, a\ is Bohr's radius, and R denotes the radius of 
curvature of the Universe. This is a result of amazing simplicity, where the spec- 
tra of the H-atom in flat space and the spectra of the hypersphere itself combine 
additively to give the spectrum of the H-atom in the hypersphere. As commented 
by Schrodinger, this formula allows for a smooth transition from 'bound' to 'free' 
motion for n w yjRja\ a value for which Schrddinger's estimate is 10 18 , the crowd- 
ing of the Bohr (Rydberg) states gradually going into the crowding that represents 
the continuum. After the first impetus given by Schrodinger, several other au- 
thors, among whom we mention Infeld, Stevenson, Hull, Higgs, Leemon, Barut 
and Wilson,0 contributed to further mathematical clarifications of the problem. 
Recently, Debergh studied the isotropic oscillators of various dimensionalities in 
curved space by means of Witten's supersymmetric quantum mechanics]!] whereas 
Bonnor investigated the effects of cosmic expansion on the hydrogen atom.0 

In a three dimensional space of constant curvature k the equivalent of the 
time-independent Schrodinger equation is (— A£ B + U K (x))^ K (x) = A v E' K (a?), where 
= ^^(Iff^l 1 / 2 ^ air) is the Laplace-Beltrami operator for the metric 
{gnjiji U K — jxV K is the potential function, and A = j?rE is the eigenvalue param- 
eter; the label ft will remind we are working on the 3D space of nonzero constant 
curvature ft. For "polar" coordinates (r, 9, </>), the metric tensor of a space with 
constant curvature k is g K = diag(l, S 2 (r), S 2 (r) sin 2 8), where the "curved" sinus 
S K (r) is defined to be ^= sin(y/Kr), r, or ^= sinh(v/— «x), for positive (ft > 0), zero 
(ft = 0), or negative curvature (ft < 0) respectively!] After separating the standard 
spherical harmonics (there is still ordinary 50(3) rotational invariance for any value 
of k) ^ K (x) = Y™ (6 , (f))G K (r) , the following radial equation can be obtained: 



1 d f C 2,, d \ , 1(1 + 1) 



S 2 K (r)dr V KV 'drj S*(r) 



G K (r) = . (2) 



This radial equation does not reduce to the standard ID Schrodinger form with 
an effective potential but instead still contains a first derivative term of the type 
— j, jp: G R (r), where T K {r) is a similar notation for the curved tangent function as 
that for the curved sinus, so that T K (r) = -4= tan(y / ftr) for k > 0, T K (r) = r for 
k = 0, and T K (r) — tanh(-\/— kt) for k < 0. Elimination of this first derivative 
term, leading to various so-called normal forms of Eq (2), can be done in many 
ways as exemplified by the works on the hydrogen atom in curved space of positive 
curvature. Of course, the spectrum does not depend on the method employed. 

In this approach the radial coordinate r has dimensions of length. There are 
two length scales at hand. One is introduced through the coupling constant of the 
potential, and in the case of the hydrogen atom is the Bohr radius a\ — Ti 2 /me 2 . 
The other, which does not appear in flat space, is set by the space "curvature 
radius", R = 1/\/k or R = l/y/—K according as k > or k < 0. 

3. We present now details on the (Kepler-Coulomb) hydrogen atom problem in 
spaces of constant curvature. The potential is V(r) = —e 2 /(Rta,n(r/R)) for positive 
and V(r) — — e 2 /(i?tanh(r/i?)) for negative curvature, respectively; these poten- 



Hydrogen atom 3 



tials as well as the euclidean one can be described together as V K (r) = — e 2 /T K (r). 
Using the change of the independent variable y = l/T K (r), the term with the first 
derivative disappears and the radial equation is writen in the form 



G K + 



X + /3y 1(1 + 1) 



_(n + y 2 ) 



2\2 



n + y 2 



G K = , 



(3) 



where f3 



2me" 



— . For positive curvature and using "natural" units where k = 1 



h 2 ai ' 

and r appear as the dimensionless angle \ = r/R, measured in radians, Eq (3) is 
precisely Stevenson's equation 2. 

If k ^ 0, Eq (3) has three singular regular points at y — {+^/—k, oo}; when 
k = there is an irregular singularity at y — 0. We are going to solve first the k^O 
case and k = will follow as a limiting case. The existence of three singularities 
suggests us to introduce a new change of variable in order to place the singularities 
at the standard positions {0,1, oo}; this is accomplished by means of a Mobius 
transformation, indeed y = \J—k(z — 2)/z, leading to an equation for a function, 
say f(z), for which a standard decomposition of the type f(z) = z p (l — z) q g(z) is 
applied. This leads to the equation for the function g(z) 



z(l - z)g"(z) + [2 + 2p-2(p + q+ l)z}g'(z) + C(z) g(z) = , 



(4) 



where the coefficient C(z) depends on {p, q, I, /3, k, A} and reduces to the constant 
— ab of hypergeometric type if the following two conditions are satisfied 



p(p+l) = 1(1 + 1) , 



q 2 -q 



4k 



(5) 



From Eqs (4,5), the following identification of the hypergeometric parameters a, b 
and c in terms of / and p 7 q can be obtained 



a + b+1 = 2(p + q + l) 



ab= (p+l)(p + 2q) 



0\ 



4k 



c= 2p+2 . (6) 



The first Eq in (5) has two solutions p = I and p = — (I + 1); our choice will be the 
first one to avoid singularities at r = z = 0. For simplicity, let us introduce two 
new parameters 



k + A + (3s 



n + X — (3\ 



(7) 



From the two possible solutions of the second Eq in (5) 



9± = 2 ( 1±UJ -) > 
we choose q + , and therefore the solutions of (6) are 



a + = I + 1 + - (<x>_ 



I + 1 + - (w- +U)+) 



21 



(8) 



(9) 



4 L.M. Nieto, H.C. Rosu, M. Santander 



We have now all the ingredients to write down the solution of (4) , but first remark 
that in order to have a well behaved physical solution, the function 2 -Fi(a+, b + ; c; z) 
has to be a polynomial, which implies a + = —to e {0, — 1, —2, . . .}. Using (7) and 
(9), this condition leads us to the following energy quantization 

X = -^r + (n 2 -l) K or E n = B (-\ + {n 2 -l)Kal) , n = l + m+l, (10) 



4n 2 

where B = me i /(2h 2 ) is Rydberg's constant. The physical solution for g(z) is 

g(z) = 2 F 1 (l + l + (w_ - u>+)/2, 1 + 1 + (co_ + w+)/2; 2^ + 2; z) , (11) 

where the first argument is a negative integer —to and the hypergeometric function 
reduces to a Jacobi polynomial Pm +1, ™ + ("-+"+)/ 2 ) (1 — 2z). From here the solution 
G K {r) can be found to be 

G K (r) cx (S K (r)) 1 e -v^r(;+2 9+ ) x (12) 
2 Fi (i + 1 + ^t^, / + 1 + ^¥±;2l + 2; 2^5 K (r) e~^ r ) 



2 

cx (S K (r))' e -v'=^r(i+2 <z+ )p j (2i+i,-„+(a,-+u )+ )/2)^ _ A ^/^S K (r) e~^ r ). 

4. We will show now that the flat space limit of Eq (12) leads to the well 
known result in terms of associated Laguerre polynomials. Taking into account the 
following approximations for small values of k, and the standard limiting relation 
from the Jacobi to Laguerre polynomials: 



S K (r) = r + 0{n) , (13) 
+ 0(Vk), (14) 

+ 0(«), (15) 



/ ^(l + 2q+) = ^\^r + 0(^), (14) 

LU- — U + (3 



2 2V^ 

l + l + ^± = ^+0(^), (16) 

^S K (r)e^ r = V^r + 0( K ), (17) 

\im P^(l-2xM = L^x) , (18) 

v— >0 

where A = — /? 2 /(4n 2 ) is the value of the eigenvalue parameter for n = 0. From 
the second form in Eq (12) we get 

G (r) cx r i e- v ^ I " r limPi 2Z+1 ^" + ^- + " + )/ 2 )(l-4V^S* K (r)e-^ r ) 

oc r l e-^ r L 2 !+ 1 (2^\' r) . (19) 

The same result can be of course obtained directly from the first form in Eq 
(12) by using the definition of the confluent hypergeometric function iF\(a, c; z) — 
limt^oo 2^1 (a, b, c; §), and the fact that when the first argument is a negative in- 
teger —to this reduces to a Laguerre polynomial, to, 21 + 2;z) cx L 2 [ +1 (z). 



Hydrogen atom 5 



Therefore we reach the right flat space result, starting from either the 3D spherical 
or 3D hyperbolic spaces. 

5. At the request of the Editor we briefly discuss whether or not recently 
proposed "minimal length" effects may carry significance for the H-atoml] These 
effects lead to modifications of the uncertainty relations and are related to either 
vogue ideas implied by string theories and non-commutative geometry, or by any 
type of possible non-pointlike structures within any quantum particleja in our case 
the electron. At the formal level, a rather general procedure of modifying the 
uncertainty principles is provided by the Kempf-Mangano-Manni change of the 
mixed commutator in the Heisenberg algebra 

[xi,pj] = ih(5ij + jpipj + jSijp 2 ) (20) 

where y/j — C/h is a deformation parameter introducing the new length scale C 
in the problem at hand. If gravitational effects are taken into account there are 
minute modifications in other commutators as well.E3 

In the first perturbative order in 7 the consequences of this 'minimally' m odi fied 
Heisenberg algebra on the H-spectrum have been recently studied by Brau.EU We 
write Brau's result for the corrected energy eigenvalues in the slightly changed form 

As one can see, the correction is always positive and is maximal for the ground 
state, leading to a relative decrease Qc = AEx/Ex = —20(C/ai) 2 of the hydrogen 
ionization energy, which would mean a very tiny calibration effect in the Ryd- 
berg constant. Within each n multiplet the effect is maximal for the I = levels: 
AE n fi/ 'E n fi — — 4(£/ai) 2 (8n — 3)/n 2 . This suggests looking to the accuracy in the 
frequency data for the IS — 2S transition, which at the present time is lKHzEl 
The precision in the energy difference between the two levels is about 10 -12 eV, 
implying C < 0.01 fm. If we discard any non-pointlike structure within the elec- 
tron and claim that a fundamental length scale parameter may be only the Planck 
length, C = Lp, then the relative effect in the Rydberg calibration constant is 
Q P = -20(L P /ai) 2 re -2 • 10~ 48 . 

Putting together in the H-spectrum the extremely small fundamental effects 
discussed here we get the following formula 

--K^ + <S 2 ^^ + K< "' ,3( " 3 - 1) )- ,22) 

For the ground state, n = 1, the constant curvature (or "Schrodinger" ) effect does 
not contribute and one is left with the minimal length effect (for the Planck case of 
relative order 10 -48 as aforementioned). For n = 2, and for the estimate R/a\ ps 
10 36 , the cosmological effect which may be either positive or negative, according 
to the sign of the space curvature, is of the order | Ai?2 / ^2 1 ~ 10~ 71 , whereas the 



6 L.M. Nieto, H.C. Rosu, M. Santander 



order of a Planckian effect is AE2/E2 ~ 10 -48 . The two effects become comparable 
(of relative order 10~ 52 — 10 -53 ) around n = 10 5 , but this is a Rydberg region 
as yet unavailable, not to mention the "Schrodinger" range n = 10 18 where the 
"cosmological" effect is of relative order one. The present day detected Rydberg 
atoms are at n < 10 3 . However, all these hopeless estimates change drastically for 
£^> Lp and/or in strong local curvature fields. 

Acknowledgements 

This work was supported by Projects from CONACyT (No. 458100-5-25844E), 
DGES from the Spanish Ministerio de Education (PB98-0370), and Junta de Casti- 
11a y Leon (C02/97). H.C.R. wishes to acknowledge the kind hospitality at the 
Departamento de Fi'sica Teorica, U. de Valladolid, and F. Brau for correspondence. 
We acknowledge D.V. Ahluwalia for suggesting to comment on the minimal length 
effect as related to the context of this work, and for other useful remarks. 



References 



1. E. Schrodinger, Proc. R. Irish Acad. A46, 9 (1940). 

2. See for example, J. Audretsch and G. Schafer, Gen. Rel. Grav. 9, 243, 489 (1978); L. 
Parker, Phys. Rev. D22, 1922 (1980); F. Pinto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 3839 (1993); A. 
Zecca, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, 945 (1999). 

3. L. Infeld, Phys. Rev. 59, 737 (1941); A.F. Stevenson, Phys. Rev 59, 842 (1941); L. 
Infeld and T.E. Hull, Rev. Mod. Phys. 23, 21 (1951); P.W. Higgs, J. Phys. A12, 
309 (1979); H.I. Leemon, J. Phys. A12, 489 (1979); A.O. Barut and R. Wilson, Phys. 
Lett. A110, 351 (1985). 

4. N. Debergh, J. Phys. A30, 7427 (1997). 

5. W. Bonnor, Class. Quant. Grav. 16, 1313 (1999). 

6. A. Ballesteros, F.J. Herranz, M.A. del Olmo and M. Santander, J. Phys. A26, 5801 
(1993); M. F. Ranada and M. Santander, J. Math. Phys. 40, 5026 (1999). A complete 
exposition of this formalism can be found in J. F. Herranz, R. Ortega and M. Santander, 



math-ph 9910041 



7. For a recent review, see R.J. Adler and D.I. Santiago, Mod. Phys. Lett. A14, 1371 
(1999). 

8. A. Kempf, J. Phys. A30, 2093 (1997). 

9. A. Kempf, G. Mangano, and R.B. Mann, Phys. Rev. D52, 1108 (1995). 

10. D.V. Ahluwalia, Phys. Lett. B339, 3 01 (1994). 

11. F. Brau, J. Phys. A32, 7691 (1999) ( |quant-ph/9905033| ). 

12. T. Udem et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 2646 (1997); B. de Beauvoir et al., Phys. Rev. 
Lett. 78, 440 (1997)