Talk:Rectangular potential barrier

message: I already created an image to explain the notation but think the quality of it could be vastly improved. Maybe the case E<V_0 (decaying wave functions in the barrier region) could be incorporated in the same figure, or a separtate figure provided. It would be good if somebody could check the equations and English as well. Bamse 05:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I noticed the only representation of this article was for the free states, but would it not be insightful to also explain the bound(tunneling) states as well?128.235.8.144 (talk) 20:52, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: E<V

message: I propose renaming of the pages Finite potential barrier (QM), Delta potential barrier (QM), and Delta potential well (QM) to versions without the "(QM)" in the title, as this seems to be the convention used elsewhere such as Finite potential well. Does this seem reasonable?--GregRM 13:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine with me. If the QM is dropped the calculation/explanation for the classical case should be extended though. So far I only wrote a one-line comparison. --Bamse 03:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming suggestion 

message: I think square potential should definitely be merged in here.  This article is lacking in introduction (it plunges right in to dense math); some of the nice intro from square potential could be used here to give a quick overview so that the casual reader isn't scared off from the start. Also the graphic from square potential complements nicely the one here. (I am a newbie and don't have the confidence to merge articles yet.)  HEL 01:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, at 06:27, 9 November 2006.  This is the last version of the square potential article prior to the merge, and here is the content that was merged.  The only merging of the term square was the description of the image (right) .  As a non-expert, I'm left wondering, what is the difference between a rectangle and a square (potential)?  Is the square potential a special case of the rectangular potential?  Wbm1058 (talk) 17:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge ''square potential'' into here 

message: It seems to me that k_1, if you assume the wave function for region B is of the form B_r e^{i k_1 x}, should be \sqrt{2m (E - V_0)/\hbar^{2}}\quad 0<x<a . That is the value you get for k_1 if you plug the wave function back into shrodingers.  Also it's actually consistent with the statement that if E is less than  V_0 the term becomes imaginary and the wave function becomes an exponential decay.  Correct me if I'm wrong.
Melink14 04:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I changed it. --69.157.68.128 01:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  value for k1 

message: This figure says that {\displaystyle {\sqrt {2mV_{0}}}a/\hbar =7} {\sqrt {2mV_{0}}}a/\hbar =7. According to my calculations, this is wrong and could be around 47.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.248.116.80 (talk) 21:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transmission probability of a finite potential barrier figure 

message: Potential barrier redirects to this article. However, this article is not about potential barriers, but instead about one specific potential barrier. I believe that a stub about a general potential barrier, and how it comes about from classical potential energy would serve better for this specific search.
Brent Perreault (talk) 13:15, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: If the width of potential goes to the infinite, this belongs to step potential problem ? barrier potential problem ? 
The textbook doesn't deal with the case when the width of potential goes to the infinite.
I find out that the rate of reflction doesn't converge to that of step potential when the width of potential goes to the infinite.
How do you think of this case? 
If anyone has the interest in this case, contact me, mrhun@hanmail.net
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Younghun park (talk • contribs) 01:50, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure whether taking the limit of infinite barrier width makes any sense. Note that the derivation assumes that there are regions to the left and right of the barrier with the same wavenumber $k_0$. Taking the limit of infinite width you are not going to get rid of the region beyond the barrier and should not necessarily obtain the same results as for the step potential. bamse (talk) 21:25, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  the width of potential goes to the infinite ?