Talk:Free particle

Merge proposal[edit]

The math in this article should be merged with Klein-Gordon equation and Schroedinger equation, and then the notion of a free particle should be discussed in a less-equation-intense fashion.

I think thats right. PAR 16:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree, except that the schroedinger equation article is already quite long, and includes no solutions, only links to articles with the more common solutions. I merged the klein-gordon material into that article, as it's rather short, but I think that either the schoedinger material has to stay here or go to a special free particle (schroedingers equation), which isn't very pretty or intuitive. --Laura Scudder | Talk 18:46, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, since Schroedinger equation#Solutions of the Schrödinger equation points back to free particle, and the central Quantum mechanics article points here as well, shouldn't this perhaps be kept and expanded in simpler terms in the intro, while adding the free particle solution of the Schrödinger equation somewhere? (I'd be happy to do this, except that I have enough trouble balancing my checkbook - forget calculus.) --Kgf0 17:26, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! But how do we deal with the lengthy schroedinger equation? Karol 08:56, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

We measure its momentum precisely... I agree keeping it here and expanding it and I like how Krane, "Modern Physics" introduced the free particle when arriving at the 1D S.E., it is short and sweet. Essentially, starting with Conservation of Energy->Kinetic Energy -> de Broglie wave->Sine wave->Time Independent S.E. Then talk about the solution, which of course will be a little mathematical --Phys-x 16:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Merge. I think it would be great to discuss the free particle in a less math-intense fashion, but why merge the math into Schrodinger equation? The free particle is just one of many solutions to that equation. Pfalstad 20:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Merge Either keep it seperate or create a page (or even a catergory) entitled solutions of the schrodinger equation. Who ever is looking for a free particle is going to want the related equations as well be they classical or quantised, there's not really much else to say about them than their behaviour in theoretical situations. Schrodingers equation is long enough as it is. From a physics student's point of view its quite nice the way it is, as you can have methods to solutions to different types of quantum problems loaded on different tabs. Jsmp01 18:12, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Merge I agree. The Schrodinger's article is long enough; and especially for beginners, this is a nice and short piece to have without a lot of more difficult stuff around it.--DoctorD 03:33, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Merge I agree. The far away links between subjects are not often seen by beginners. As for an introduction, several simple ideas are easier to grasp than a complex one.

Slight ambiguity?[edit]

In the first equation we have velocity as a (bolded) vector, in the second equation we have the square of a(nonbolded italicized)quantity v, and in the statement below these we have a nonbolded nonitalicized v.

I'm assuming v = |v| and that the third v should be bolded v, but I'm not quite bold enough (no pun intended) to jump in and modify an article without some sort of confirmation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.129.106.141 (talk) 22:42, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong formula[edit]

I think there is a big mistake in the quantum mechanics part. I'm not 100 % sure, but I think that the formula E=h(bar)OMEGA only apply to a PHOTON. Am I right ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.54.238.42 (talk) 12:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]