Talk:Particle in a ring

Untitled

This page owes a lot to the ring_wave_guide page, but I felt like re-writing it to add some more derevation, and the other page is not very clear in places. And the energy is plain wrong :-).

In the comments to the ring wave guide page the energy is given as (n^2 h^2)/(2 m L^2). Note this is h, not hbar, which explains the discrepancy in the equations.

Next time you find an article riddled with errors, why not fix them instead of starting another one? 65.29.47.153 11:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sextonb, Henry DeGroot, Denevedr.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

merge

Particle in a ring is the same thing as ring wave guide, no? I think "particle in a ring" is the more common phrase. Pfalstad 11:19, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

formula question

It is unclear to me how the second derivative gradient (i.e. d^2/dx^2 + d^2/dy^2) equals (1/r^2)(d^2/dtheta^2) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.243.189.248 (talk) 15:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eigenfunctions

I believe it's ambiguous or misleading to state that $\psi (\theta )={\frac {1}{\sqrt {2\pi }}}e^{\pm in\theta }$ . This statement implies that $\psi (\theta )={\frac {1}{\sqrt {2\pi }}}e^{-in\theta }+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2\pi }}}e^{+in\theta }$ . Instead, I think it should be written as $E_{n}$ is written, defining $n$ to be positive or negative. I don't want to make this change if I'm mistaken in my understanding, but it does appear to be inconsistent notation. —Daelin 01:43, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a stub?

I removed math-stub as this doesn't seem like a stub, and in any case should be a physics one not a maths one. Qetuth (talk) 07:40, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check for gauge invariance.

--Ruhtra Patel (talk) 20:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)An article in AIP Advances suggests that any continuous eigenfunction on a ring will have a wavelength that depends on the arbitrary choice of gauge function: "Nanocircuits in loop structures: Continuous waves preclude gauge invariant wavelengths," has been published online 20 November 2018, in AIP Advances (Vol.8, Issue 11). This article is open access at https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5041020 . This implies that continuity should not be imposed on a wave function on a ring or circle. Ruhtra Patel (talk) 19:07, 11 July 2019 (UTC)Since a particle in a ring is not like a particle in a box, the IMPORTANCE of this article ought to be rated higher.[reply]