Stationary States and Energy

A hydrogen atom's electron in its ground state can sit for the age of the universe. Its electron density will not shift by a single picometer. This is true even though the electron is never actually at rest. This apparent paradox is the heart of what chemists call a stationary state. Constant motion coexists with a completely frozen probability picture. Every orbital drawn in a textbook relies on this idea. So does every energy level in an atomic spectrum. So does every vibrational or rotational quantum number used in spectroscopy. Solutions of the The Time-Independent Schrodinger Equation evolve in time in an almost trivial way. This trivial evolution is precisely what makes "orbital energy" a meaningful concept. It is also what makes it measurable and reusable. The big picture is this: the The Time-Dependent Schrodinger Equation governs how any wavefunction evolves. But for a special class of wavefunctions — the energy eigenstates — that evolution collapses. It becomes simply multiplying by a single spinning phase factor, e−iEt/ℏe^{-iEt/\hbar}. A phase factor has magnitude one, so it never touches ∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2. That single fact explains several things. It explains why an electron in a 1s1s orbital has a probability density that looks the same at every instant. It explains why atomic term symbols and vibrational quantum numbers are well-defined constants of the system. They are not instants frozen in a movie. And it explains why we can talk about "the energy of a state" as a fixed label. It need not be re-measured every femtosecond. This matters for chemistry far beyond formalism. Spectroscopy — UV-Vis, IR, NMR, photoelectron spectroscopy — is entirely a story of transitions between stationary states. The sharpness of a spectral line directly reflects how genuinely time-independent the state's energy and population are. Chemical bonding pictures, molecular orbital diagrams, and the entire idea of "electron configuration" all rest on one thing. They rest on stationary states being real, stable, reusable objects. Electron configuration is something an atom has, not something it does momentarily. Even the way we justify time-independent perturbation theory depends on this foundation. So do orbital energies from Hartree–Fock. So does the Born-Oppenheimer separation of nuclear and electronic motion. All of it depends on first nailing down what a stationary state is and is not. This article builds the idea from the separation of variables used to solve the time-dependent equation. It shows exactly why probability densities freeze while the wavefunction itself keeps spinning in the complex plane. It works through three examples: a particle in a box, a two-level system prepared in a single eigenstate, and a subtlety involving degenerate states. These examples pin down precisely what "stationary" does and does not mean.

Key takeaways
  • A stationary state is an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian: H^ψn(r⃗)=Enψn(r⃗)\hat{H}\psi_n(\vec r) = E_n \psi_n(\vec r), with a single sharp energy EnE_n.
  • Its time evolution is trivial: Ψn(r⃗,t)=ψn(r⃗) e−iEnt/ℏ\Psi_n(\vec r, t) = \psi_n(\vec r)\,e^{-iE_nt/\hbar} — just a spinning phase, nothing more.
  • The probability density ∣Ψn(r⃗,t)∣2=∣ψn(r⃗)∣2|\Psi_n(\vec r,t)|^2 = |\psi_n(\vec r)|^2 is exactly time-independent, because ∣e−iEnt/ℏ∣=1|e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}|=1.
  • Expectation values of any time-independent operator in a stationary state never change with time.
  • Superpositions of two or more different EnE_n are not stationary — cross terms oscillate at the Bohr frequency (Em−En)/ℏ(E_m-E_n)/\hbar, which is exactly how spectroscopy detects transitions.
  • Key idea: stationary states are frozen in probability but alive in phase — the phase itself becomes observable only when such a state is mixed with another.

Where this lives today

Every molecular orbital diagram drawn in an organic chemistry course, every energy level reported by a DFT or Hartree–Fock calculation, and every peak position in a UV-Vis, IR, or NMR spectrum is a statement about stationary states. In electronic structure software, computed orbital energies (Kohn–Sham eigenvalues, Hartree–Fock orbital energies) are meaningful precisely because a single Slater determinant built from occupied stationary-like orbitals gives a genuinely time-independent electron density in the mean-field approximation — the entire logical architecture of "an atom's electron configuration" depends on this. In spectroscopy, line positions in absorption and emission spectra are measured Bohr frequencies ν=(Em−En)/h\nu = (E_m-E_n)/h between pairs of stationary states, and the narrowness of a spectral line is a direct experimental signature of how close to perfectly stationary (how long-lived) the initial and final states are — natural linewidths in atomic clocks, for instance, are limited by the finite lifetime (finite "non-stationarity," strictly) of the excited clock state. In photochemistry and femtosecond spectroscopy, deliberately preparing coherent superpositions of vibrational or electronic stationary states creates "wavepackets" whose motion — bond stretching, bond breaking, conical-intersection dynamics — is entirely described by the beating cross terms derived above, oscillating at the relevant Bohr frequencies; pump–probe experiments literally watch these beats in real time. In quantum computing with molecular or atomic qubits, coherence times are set by how long a prepared superposition of two stationary states can avoid decohering back toward populating a single eigenstate, making the stability (or fragility) of superpositions relative to true stationary states a live engineering concern.

Ask the tutor: If a stationary state's probability density never changes, what physically distinguishes a ground-state atom from one sitting in an excited stationary state, if not "motion" of the electron cloud?

The physical picture

Start from the The Time-Dependent Schrodinger Equation,

iℏ∂Ψ(r⃗,t)∂t=H^ Ψ(r⃗,t),i\hbar \frac{\partial \Psi(\vec r,t)}{\partial t} = \hat{H}\,\Psi(\vec r,t),

and ask: for what class of wavefunctions is the time-dependence as simple as possible? Try separation of variables, writing Ψ(r⃗,t)=ψ(r⃗) f(t)\Psi(\vec r, t) = \psi(\vec r)\,f(t), on the assumption that H^\hat H has no explicit time-dependence (no oscillating field, no moving nuclei — just a fixed potential V(r⃗)V(\vec r)). Substituting and dividing through by ψ(r⃗)f(t)\psi(\vec r) f(t) separates the equation into a purely spatial piece and a purely temporal piece, each equal to a constant that we call EE. The spatial piece is exactly the The Time-Independent Schrodinger Equation, H^ψ(r⃗)=Eψ(r⃗)\hat H \psi(\vec r) = E\psi(\vec r), and the temporal piece integrates immediately to f(t)=e−iEt/ℏf(t) = e^{-iEt/\hbar}. The crucial physical content is what happens to the modulus of this factor. Writing EE as a real number (guaranteed because H^\hat H is Hermitian and EE is an expectation value of a physical, measurable energy), the complex exponential e−iEt/ℏe^{-iEt/\hbar} traces a point moving around the unit circle in the complex plane as tt increases — its real and imaginary parts oscillate, but its magnitude is always exactly 1. When you compute a probability density you take ∣Ψ∣2=Ψ∗Ψ|\Psi|^2 = \Psi^*\Psi, and multiplying by a unit-modulus number and then by its complex conjugate always returns 1:

∣Ψn(r⃗,t)∣2=ψn∗(r⃗) e+iEnt/ℏ  ψn(r⃗) e−iEnt/ℏ=∣ψn(r⃗)∣2.|\Psi_n(\vec r,t)|^2 = \psi_n^*(\vec r)\,e^{+iE_nt/\hbar}\;\psi_n(\vec r)\,e^{-iE_nt/\hbar} = |\psi_n(\vec r)|^2.

The exponential factors cancel identically, for every r⃗\vec r and every tt. This is not an approximation, not a slow decay, not a "quasi-stationary" statement — it is an algebraic identity. The probability density of an eigenstate of H^\hat H is exactly constant in time. This has an immediate chemical translation: orbitals, as usually drawn (electron clouds, contour surfaces, nodal patterns), are pictures of ∣ψn(r⃗)∣2|\psi_n(\vec r)|^2, and since that quantity never depends on tt, the picture is legitimately a single, permanent snapshot rather than a frame from a movie. The electron is not "sitting still" — momentum, angular momentum, and the phase of Ψ\Psi are all still dynamical — but everything an experiment can extract from ∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2 (position probabilities, and by extension anything built from position-diagonal operators) is frozen. It is essential to see why this fails the moment you leave a single eigenstate. Consider a superposition of two stationary states with different energies,

Ψ(r⃗,t)=c1ψ1(r⃗)e−iE1t/ℏ+c2ψ2(r⃗)e−iE2t/ℏ.\Psi(\vec r,t) = c_1\psi_1(\vec r)e^{-iE_1t/\hbar} + c_2\psi_2(\vec r)e^{-iE_2t/\hbar}.

Now ∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2 picks up cross terms c1∗c2 ψ1∗ψ2 e−i(E2−E1)t/ℏ+c.c.c_1^*c_2\,\psi_1^*\psi_2\,e^{-i(E_2-E_1)t/\hbar} + \text{c.c.}, and these do not cancel — they oscillate at the Bohr angular frequency ω21=(E2−E1)/ℏ\omega_{21} = (E_2-E_1)/\hbar. This is precisely the mechanism behind time-dependent probability densities, transition dipole oscillations, and spectroscopic line frequencies ν=(E2−E1)/h\nu = (E_2-E_1)/h. Stationary states are therefore the building blocks out of which all time-dependent chemical dynamics (bond vibration beating, electron transfer, wavepacket motion) is assembled, and understanding why a single eigenstate is inert is what lets you correctly identify why a superposition is not.

Figure
The spinning phase of a stationary state versus the frozen probability density
Complex phase e^{-iE t/ħ}: spins, never changes |Ψ|² t=0 t=t₁ t=t₂ Re Im Phase point traces unit circle — magnitude always 1 |ψ(x)|² for particle-in-box n=2: identical at every t x=0 x=L solid (t=0) and dashed (t=t₁) curves overlap exactly
Figure
Stationary state vs. superposition: frozen density vs. oscillating density
Single eigenstate ψ₁: |Ψ(x,t)|² constant E₁ fixed — one bump, no motion, ever Superposition c₁ψ₁+c₂ψ₂: density sloshes at ω₂₁=(E₂−E₁)/ħ red = t₀, blue dashed = t₀+Δt: shape genuinely shifts

The core ideas

The definition of a stationary state:

H^ ψn(r⃗)=En ψn(r⃗)\hat{H}\,\psi_n(\vec r) = E_n\,\psi_n(\vec r)

where: H^\hat H is the (time-independent) Hamiltonian operator, ψn(r⃗)\psi_n(\vec r) is a time-independent spatial eigenfunction, and EnE_n is the real eigenvalue — a single sharp energy value associated with that eigenfunction.

Reading: this is the same equation as the The Time-Independent Schrodinger Equation — it says nothing yet about time, only that ψn\psi_n is a special function for which applying H^\hat H just rescales it by EnE_n rather than distorting its shape. The full time-dependent stationary-state wavefunction:

Ψn(r⃗,t)=ψn(r⃗) e−iEnt/ℏ\Psi_n(\vec r, t) = \psi_n(\vec r)\, e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}

where: Ψn(r⃗,t)\Psi_n(\vec r,t) solves the full The Time-Dependent Schrodinger Equation, ψn(r⃗)\psi_n(\vec r) is the same spatial eigenfunction as above, EnE_n is its eigenvalue, ℏ\hbar is the reduced Planck constant, and i=−1i=\sqrt{-1}.

Reading: all of the time-dependence of an energy eigenstate is packaged into one complex exponential multiplying a completely static spatial shape — the "shape" of the wavefunction never changes, only its overall phase angle rotates uniformly in time. The invariance of the probability density:

∣Ψn(r⃗,t)∣2=Ψn∗(r⃗,t) Ψn(r⃗,t)=∣ψn(r⃗)∣2|\Psi_n(\vec r,t)|^2 = \Psi_n^*(\vec r,t)\,\Psi_n(\vec r,t) = |\psi_n(\vec r)|^2

where: the left side is the quantum mechanical probability density at time tt; the right side shows it equals the time-independent quantity ∣ψn(r⃗)∣2|\psi_n(\vec r)|^2 for all tt.

Reading: because e−iEnt/ℏ⋅e+iEnt/ℏ=1e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}\cdot e^{+iE_nt/\hbar} = 1 identically, the "movie" of the electron's probability cloud is a single still frame played forever — this is the literal meaning of the word stationary. The invariance of expectation values of time-independent operators:

⟨A^⟩n(t)=∫Ψn∗(r⃗,t) A^ Ψn(r⃗,t) dr⃗=∫ψn∗(r⃗) A^ ψn(r⃗) dr⃗\langle \hat A \rangle_n(t) = \int \Psi_n^*(\vec r,t)\,\hat A\,\Psi_n(\vec r,t)\,d\vec r = \int \psi_n^*(\vec r)\,\hat A\,\psi_n(\vec r)\,d\vec r

where: A^\hat A is any observable operator (position, momentum, kinetic energy, dipole moment operator) that does not itself depend explicitly on tt; ⟨A^⟩n\langle \hat A\rangle_n is the expectation value in state nn.

Reading: because the phase factor and its conjugate always cancel wherever A^\hat A doesn't act on tt directly, every measurable average computed from a single stationary state is a fixed number — this is why "the dipole moment of the ground state" or "the average kinetic energy of an electron in a 2p2p orbital" are meaningful constants rather than time-labeled quantities. The Bohr frequency condition, showing what breaks the stationarity:

ωmn=Em−Enℏ,νmn=Em−Enh\omega_{mn} = \frac{E_m - E_n}{\hbar}, \qquad \nu_{mn} = \frac{E_m-E_n}{h}

where: ωmn\omega_{mn} is the angular frequency and νmn\nu_{mn} the ordinary frequency at which cross terms between states mm and nn oscillate in a superposition, and h=2πℏh = 2\pi\hbar is Planck's constant.

Reading: a single stationary state has Em=EnE_m = E_n trivially (same state), so ωmn=0\omega_{mn}=0 — nothing oscillates; only genuine superpositions of different energies produce the nonzero beat frequency that spectroscopy measures as an absorption or emission line.

Derivation AFrom the Time-Dependent Schrödinger Equation to the stationary-state phase factor

Goal. Starting only from the general time-dependent equation and the assumption of a time-independent Hamiltonian, derive the exact form Ψn(r⃗,t)=ψn(r⃗)e−iEnt/ℏ\Psi_n(\vec r,t) = \psi_n(\vec r)e^{-iE_nt/\hbar} and show why EnE_n must be real.

Step 1 — Separation ansatz. Assume a solution of product form, Ψ(r⃗,t)=ψ(r⃗)f(t)\Psi(\vec r,t) = \psi(\vec r)f(t), where ψ\psi depends only on position and ff only on time. This is an ansatz, not an assumption that all solutions look like this — we are hunting for a special, simple class of solutions.

Step 2 — Substitute into the governing equation. Insert the product form into

iℏ∂Ψ∂t=H^Ψ.i\hbar\frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial t} = \hat H \Psi.

Since H^\hat H acts only on spatial coordinates and f(t)f(t) is a scalar multiplier with respect to that action,

iℏ ψ(r⃗) df(t)dt=f(t) H^ψ(r⃗).i\hbar\,\psi(\vec r)\,\frac{df(t)}{dt} = f(t)\,\hat H\psi(\vec r).

Step 3 — Divide through by ψ(r⃗)f(t)\psi(\vec r) f(t). This isolates the time- and space-dependent pieces on opposite sides:

iℏf(t)df(t)dt=H^ψ(r⃗)ψ(r⃗).\frac{i\hbar}{f(t)}\frac{df(t)}{dt} = \frac{\hat H \psi(\vec r)}{\psi(\vec r)}.

The left side is a function of tt alone; the right side is a function of r⃗\vec r alone (once H^\hat H has acted). Since tt and r⃗\vec r are independent variables, the only way both sides can be equal for all tt and all r⃗\vec r is if both sides equal the same constant — call it EE.

Step 4 — Solve the temporal equation. Setting the left side to EE,

iℏdf(t)dt=E f(t)⟹dff=Eiℏ dt=−iEℏ dt.i\hbar\frac{df(t)}{dt} = E\,f(t) \quad\Longrightarrow\quad \frac{df}{f} = \frac{E}{i\hbar}\,dt = -\frac{iE}{\hbar}\,dt.

Integrating both sides from 00 to tt gives ln⁡f(t)−ln⁡f(0)=−iEt/ℏ\ln f(t) - \ln f(0) = -iEt/\hbar, so, absorbing the overall constant f(0)f(0) into the normalization of ψ(r⃗)\psi(\vec r),

f(t)=e−iEt/ℏ.f(t) = e^{-iEt/\hbar}.

Step 5 — Identify the spatial equation. Setting the right side to EE as well gives H^ψ(r⃗)=Eψ(r⃗)\hat H\psi(\vec r) = E\psi(\vec r), which is exactly the The Time-Independent Schrodinger Equation — so EE is an eigenvalue of H^\hat H, and ψ(r⃗)\psi(\vec r) is the corresponding eigenfunction.

Step 6 — Why EE must be real. Because H^\hat H is Hermitian (it represents an observable, total energy), its eigenvalues are guaranteed real. Concretely: taking the inner product of H^ψ=Eψ\hat H\psi=E\psi with ψ∗\psi^* and integrating gives E=⟨ψ∣H^∣ψ⟩/⟨ψ∣ψ⟩E = \langle \psi|\hat H|\psi\rangle / \langle\psi|\psi\rangle, and Hermiticity forces ⟨ψ∣H^∣ψ⟩\langle\psi|\hat H|\psi\rangle to equal its own complex conjugate, hence to be real. If EE had a nonzero imaginary part E=ER−iΓE = E_R - i\Gamma, then ∣f(t)∣2=e−2Γt/ℏ|f(t)|^2 = e^{-2\Gamma t/\hbar} would decay or blow up exponentially — probability would leak away, violating conservation of total probability. Reality of EnE_n is therefore not a bookkeeping convenience; it is exactly what is required for ∣f(t)∣=1|f(t)|=1 and hence for stationarity to hold at all.

Conclusion. Assembling Steps 4 and 5, Ψn(r⃗,t)=ψn(r⃗)e−iEnt/ℏ\Psi_n(\vec r,t) = \psi_n(\vec r)e^{-iE_nt/\hbar}, with EnE_n guaranteed real by the Hermiticity of H^\hat H — precisely the result stated as the core equation above.

Go deeper · Derivation B · 2 minWhy superpositions are not stationary, and what "stationary" precisely excludes
Derivation BWhy superpositions are not stationary, and what "stationary" precisely excludes

Goal. Show explicitly, with the algebra carried through, that a linear combination of two energy eigenstates has a time-dependent probability density, and pin down the exact condition under which stationarity is lost.

Step 1 — Write the general superposition. Let ψ1,ψ2\psi_1,\psi_2 be normalized eigenfunctions of H^\hat H with distinct eigenvalues E1≠E2E_1 \ne E_2, and build

Ψ(r⃗,t)=c1 ψ1(r⃗) e−iE1t/ℏ+c2 ψ2(r⃗) e−iE2t/ℏ,\Psi(\vec r,t) = c_1\,\psi_1(\vec r)\,e^{-iE_1t/\hbar} + c_2\,\psi_2(\vec r)\,e^{-iE_2t/\hbar},

with ∣c1∣2+∣c2∣2=1|c_1|^2+|c_2|^2=1 for normalization (assuming ψ1,ψ2\psi_1,\psi_2 orthonormal).

Step 2 — Expand the modulus squared. Compute ∣Ψ∣2=Ψ∗Ψ|\Psi|^2 = \Psi^*\Psi term by term:

∣Ψ(r⃗,t)∣2=∣c1∣2∣ψ1(r⃗)∣2+∣c2∣2∣ψ2(r⃗)∣2+[c1∗c2 ψ1∗(r⃗)ψ2(r⃗) e−i(E2−E1)t/ℏ+c.c.].|\Psi(\vec r,t)|^2 = |c_1|^2|\psi_1(\vec r)|^2 + |c_2|^2|\psi_2(\vec r)|^2 + \Big[c_1^*c_2\,\psi_1^*(\vec r)\psi_2(\vec r)\,e^{-i(E_2-E_1)t/\hbar} + \text{c.c.}\Big].

The first two terms are manifestly time-independent — they are exactly what you would get from each eigenstate separately, weighted by populations ∣c1∣2|c_1|^2 and ∣c2∣2|c_2|^2.

Step 3 — Isolate the cross term. The bracketed cross term is the entire source of any time-dependence. Writing c1∗c2 ψ1∗ψ2=∣c1∣∣c2∣ ρ(r⃗) eiθ(r⃗)c_1^*c_2\,\psi_1^*\psi_2 = |c_1||c_2|\,\rho(\vec r)\,e^{i\theta(\vec r)} in polar form (where ρ\rho is a real amplitude and θ\theta a spatial phase), the cross term becomes

2∣c1∣∣c2∣ ρ(r⃗) cos⁡ ⁣[θ(r⃗)−(E2−E1)t/ℏ].2|c_1||c_2|\,\rho(\vec r)\,\cos\!\big[\theta(\vec r) - (E_2-E_1)t/\hbar\big].

This is manifestly a function of tt through the cosine — it is a beat term oscillating at the Bohr angular frequency ω21=(E2−E1)/ℏ\omega_{21} = (E_2-E_1)/\hbar.

Step 4 — Show the term vanishes only in special cases. The cross term disappears identically only if either (a) c1=0c_1=0 or c2=0c_2=0 (only one state is populated — recovering a pure stationary state), or (b) E1=E2E_1=E_2 exactly (a degenerate combination, discussed further below), or (c) ρ(r⃗)≡0\rho(\vec r)\equiv 0 everywhere, which cannot happen for genuinely overlapping, nonorthogonal-in-space eigenfunctions with nonzero coefficients. In the generic case of two distinct, non-degenerate energies with both c1,c2≠0c_1,c_2\ne 0, the cross term is nonzero and time-dependent.

Step 5 — Connect to expectation values, not just density. The same algebra applied to ⟨A^⟩(t)=∫Ψ∗A^Ψ dr⃗\langle \hat A\rangle(t) = \int \Psi^*\hat A\Psi\,d\vec r for a general observable A^\hat A gives

⟨A^⟩(t)=∣c1∣2⟨A^⟩1+∣c2∣2⟨A^⟩2+2∣c1∣∣c2∣ Re[⟨ψ1∣A^∣ψ2⟩ ei(θ12−ω21t)],\langle \hat A\rangle(t) = |c_1|^2\langle\hat A\rangle_1 + |c_2|^2\langle\hat A\rangle_2 + 2|c_1||c_2|\,\mathrm{Re}\Big[\langle\psi_1|\hat A|\psi_2\rangle\, e^{i(\theta_{12}-\omega_{21}t)}\Big],

so any observable with a nonzero transition matrix element ⟨ψ1∣A^∣ψ2⟩\langle\psi_1|\hat A|\psi_2\rangle between the two eigenstates will oscillate at ω21\omega_{21} — this is the microscopic mechanism behind oscillating dipole moments, Rabi-type population transfer, and the emission/absorption of light at the Bohr frequency.

Step 6 — The degenerate exception. If E1=E2=EE_1=E_2=E exactly (a genuine degeneracy — e.g. the 2px,2py,2pz2p_x,2p_y,2p_z orbitals of hydrogen all at the same energy), the cross term's time-dependence collapses because ω21=0\omega_{21}=0: any linear combination of degenerate eigenstates is itself a stationary state, since it can be written as [c1ψ1(r⃗)+c2ψ2(r⃗)]e−iEt/ℏ\big[c_1\psi_1(\vec r)+c_2\psi_2(\vec r)\big]e^{-iEt/\hbar} — a single common phase factor multiplying a new, still time-independent spatial function. This is precisely why hybridized combinations like sp3sp^3 orbitals, built from degenerate 2s,2p2s,2p states of a free atom's basis, remain physically sensible stationary-like objects only within a degenerate manifold, or once the true (non-degenerate, hybridized) molecular Hamiltonian is used self-consistently.

Conclusion. A wavefunction is stationary (frozen density, static expectation values) if and only if it is built from eigenstates that share exactly one energy eigenvalue. The moment two or more distinct, non-degenerate energies are mixed with nonzero weight, both the density and all coupled observables acquire genuine time-dependence oscillating at Bohr frequencies — the mathematical origin of every spectroscopic transition.

Worked examples

Example 1 — Foundational: the particle in a box, checking stationarity explicitly. Consider an electron confined to a one-dimensional box of length L=0.53 nmL = 0.53\ \text{nm} (a rough proxy for a conjugated chain), in the n=3n=3 eigenstate. The normalized eigenfunctions and eigenvalues are

ψ3(x)=2Lsin⁡ ⁣(3πxL),E3=9h28meL2.\psi_3(x) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}}\sin\!\left(\frac{3\pi x}{L}\right), \qquad E_3 = \frac{9h^2}{8m_eL^2}.

Plugging in h=6.626×10−34 J sh = 6.626\times10^{-34}\ \text{J s}, me=9.109×10−31 kgm_e = 9.109\times10^{-31}\ \text{kg}, L=5.30×10−10 mL = 5.30\times10^{-10}\ \text{m}:

E3=9×(6.626×10−34)28×9.109×10−31×(5.30×10−10)2 J.E_3 = \frac{9 \times (6.626\times10^{-34})^2}{8 \times 9.109\times10^{-31}\times (5.30\times10^{-10})^2}\ \text{J}.

Numerator: 9×4.390×10−67=3.951×10−66 J2s29 \times 4.390\times10^{-67} = 3.951\times10^{-66}\ \text{J}^2\text{s}^2. Denominator: 8×9.109×10−31×2.809×10−19=2.047×10−48 kg m28 \times 9.109\times10^{-31}\times 2.809\times10^{-19} = 2.047\times10^{-48}\ \text{kg m}^2.

E3=3.951×10−662.047×10−48 J=1.930×10−18 J=12.05 eV.E_3 = \frac{3.951\times10^{-66}}{2.047\times10^{-48}}\ \text{J} = 1.930\times10^{-18}\ \text{J} = 12.05\ \text{eV}.

The full time-dependent stationary state is Ψ3(x,t)=ψ3(x)e−iE3t/ℏ\Psi_3(x,t) = \psi_3(x)e^{-iE_3t/\hbar}. Compute the probability density at t=0t=0 and at a later, deliberately awkward time t1=3.7×10−16 st_1 = 3.7\times10^{-16}\ \text{s}:

∣Ψ3(x,0)∣2=∣ψ3(x)∣2=2Lsin⁡2 ⁣(3πxL).|\Psi_3(x,0)|^2 = |\psi_3(x)|^2 = \frac{2}{L}\sin^2\!\left(\frac{3\pi x}{L}\right).

At t1t_1 the phase angle accumulated is

ϕ=E3t1ℏ=1.930×10−18×3.7×10−161.0546×10−34=6.77×103 rad,\phi = \frac{E_3 t_1}{\hbar} = \frac{1.930\times10^{-18}\times 3.7\times10^{-16}}{1.0546\times10^{-34}} = 6.77\times10^{3}\ \text{rad},

an enormous, essentially arbitrary angle on the unit circle — yet

∣Ψ3(x,t1)∣2=ψ3∗(x)eiϕ ψ3(x)e−iϕ=∣ψ3(x)∣2,|\Psi_3(x,t_1)|^2 = \psi_3^*(x)e^{i\phi}\,\psi_3(x)e^{-i\phi} = |\psi_3(x)|^2,

identical to the t=0t=0 result, term for term, regardless of how large or awkward ϕ\phi is. Limiting-case check: as t→∞t\to\infty, ϕ→∞\phi\to\infty and the phase winds around the circle infinitely many times, yet ∣Ψ3∣2|\Psi_3|^2 never changes at all — the density has no time-decay, no dephasing, no drift, confirming the exact cancellation is not merely a short-time approximation.

Example 2 — Applied: population of a single vibrational eigenstate and its dipole moment. A diatomic molecule (take CO, reduced mass μ=6.860\mu = 6.860 u =1.139×10−26 kg= 1.139\times10^{-26}\ \text{kg}, force constant k=1902 N/mk = 1902\ \text{N/m}) sits purely in its harmonic-oscillator vibrational ground state v=0v=0, i.e. genuinely a single stationary state with no admixture of v=1v=1 or higher. Its angular frequency is

ω=kμ=19021.139×10−26=1.670×1029 rad/s=4.087×1014 rad/s,\omega = \sqrt{\frac{k}{\mu}} = \sqrt{\frac{1902}{1.139\times10^{-26}}} = \sqrt{1.670\times10^{29}}\ \text{rad/s} = 4.087\times10^{14}\ \text{rad/s},

and its energy eigenvalue is

E0=12ℏω=12×1.0546×10−34×4.087×1014=2.155×10−20 J.E_0 = \frac{1}{2}\hbar\omega = \frac{1}{2}\times1.0546\times10^{-34}\times4.087\times10^{14} = 2.155\times10^{-20}\ \text{J}.

The full stationary wavefunction is Ψ0(x,t)=ψ0(x) e−iE0t/ℏ\Psi_0(x,t) = \psi_0(x)\,e^{-iE_0t/\hbar}, where ψ0(x)\psi_0(x) is the real Gaussian ground-state harmonic-oscillator function. Because the vibrational dipole operator (to leading order, μ^(x)≈μ0+(dμ/dx)0x\hat\mu(x) \approx \mu_0 + (d\mu/dx)_0 x) is time-independent and this is a pure eigenstate, its expectation value is

⟨μ^⟩0(t)=μ0+(dμdx)0∫ψ0∗(x) x ψ0(x) dx=μ0,\langle \hat\mu\rangle_0 (t)= \mu_0 + \left(\frac{d\mu}{dx}\right)_0 \int \psi_0^*(x)\, x\,\psi_0(x)\,dx = \mu_0,

since ∫ψ0∗x ψ0 dx=0\int \psi_0^* x\,\psi_0\,dx = 0 by the symmetry of the ground-state Gaussian about x=0x=0 — a constant, time-independent value equal simply to the permanent dipole moment μ0\mu_0, unaffected by the phase factor. No IR emission or absorption occurs from this state alone: a pure vibrational eigenstate does not radiate, however long you wait. Limiting-case check: setting (dμ/dx)0→(d\mu/dx)_0 \to any nonzero value changes nothing about this conclusion, because the integral — not the size of the dipole derivative — is what enforces zero net oscillating dipole in a single eigenstate; only mixing in v=1v=1 (with its odd-parity wavefunction) makes ∫ψ0∗x ψ1 dx≠0\int \psi_0^* x\,\psi_1\,dx \ne 0 and produces a genuinely oscillating, IR-active dipole.

Example 3 — Exam/competition level: a two-level system with unequal, non-round coefficients and a degenerate twist. A model two-state system (e.g. a simplified treatment of an avoided crossing) has non-degenerate eigenstates ψ1,ψ2\psi_1,\psi_2 with E1=2.35 eVE_1 = 2.35\ \text{eV} and E2=3.80 eVE_2 = 3.80\ \text{eV}, prepared at t=0t=0 in the superposition

Ψ(x,0)=0.60 ψ1(x)+1−0.602 ψ2(x)=0.60 ψ1(x)+0.800 ψ2(x),\Psi(x,0) = 0.60\,\psi_1(x) + \sqrt{1-0.60^2}\,\psi_2(x) = 0.60\,\psi_1(x) + 0.800\,\psi_2(x),

already normalized since 0.602+0.8002=0.36+0.64=1.000.60^2+0.800^2 = 0.36+0.64=1.00. This is not stationary. The full time-dependent wavefunction is

Ψ(x,t)=0.60 ψ1(x) e−iE1t/ℏ+0.800 ψ2(x) e−iE2t/ℏ.\Psi(x,t) = 0.60\,\psi_1(x)\,e^{-iE_1t/\hbar} + 0.800\,\psi_2(x)\,e^{-iE_2t/\hbar}.

The Bohr frequency governing oscillation of any cross-coupled observable is

ω21=E2−E1ℏ=(3.80−2.35) eV×1.602×10−19 J/eV1.0546×10−34 J s=2.323×10−191.0546×10−34=2.203×1015 rad/s,\omega_{21} = \frac{E_2-E_1}{\hbar} = \frac{(3.80-2.35)\ \text{eV}\times 1.602\times10^{-19}\ \text{J/eV}}{1.0546\times10^{-34}\ \text{J s}} = \frac{2.323\times10^{-19}}{1.0546\times10^{-34}} = 2.203\times10^{15}\ \text{rad/s},

corresponding to an oscillation period

T=2πω21=6.2832.203×1015=2.852×10−15 s≈2.85 fs.T = \frac{2\pi}{\omega_{21}} = \frac{6.283}{2.203\times10^{15}} = 2.852\times10^{-15}\ \text{s} \approx 2.85\ \text{fs}.

If ψ1,ψ2\psi_1,\psi_2 have a nonzero transition dipole matrix element ⟨ψ1∣x^∣ψ2⟩=0.045 nm\langle\psi_1|\hat x|\psi_2\rangle = 0.045\ \text{nm} (a representative off-diagonal position matrix element), the expectation value of position oscillates as

⟨x⟩(t)=2(0.60)(0.800)(0.045 nm)cos⁡(ω21t+θ12)=0.0432 nm×cos⁡(ω21t+θ12),\langle x\rangle(t) = 2(0.60)(0.800)(0.045\ \text{nm})\cos(\omega_{21}t + \theta_{12}) = 0.0432\ \text{nm}\times\cos(\omega_{21}t+\theta_{12}),

a genuine, measurable oscillation with amplitude 0.0432 nm0.0432\ \text{nm} and period 2.85 fs2.85\ \text{fs} — this is the mathematical seed of a Rabi-like coherent oscillation. Limiting-case check: if instead E2→E1E_2 \to E_1 (degeneracy), ω21→0\omega_{21}\to 0 and cos⁡(ω21t+θ12)→cos⁡(θ12)\cos(\omega_{21}t+\theta_{12}) \to \cos(\theta_{12}), a genuine constant — the oscillation freezes and the superposition becomes stationary again, exactly consistent with Step 6 of the second derivation above. Also check the opposite population extreme: setting the coefficient on ψ2\psi_2 to zero (0.800→00.800\to 0, forcing 0.60→10.60\to1 for normalization) collapses the cross term's prefactor 2(1)(0)=02(1)(0)=0 to zero identically, correctly recovering a pure, stationary ψ1\psi_1 eigenstate with no oscillation at all.

Limiting cases, scope & common traps

SituationWhat happensWhy
Pure eigenstate, H^\hat H time-independentFully stationary: ∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2, all ⟨A^⟩\langle \hat A\rangle constantPhase factor cancels exactly in Ψ∗Ψ\Psi^*\Psi
Superposition of degenerate eigenstates (E1=E2E_1=E_2)Still stationaryCommon phase factor e−iEt/ℏe^{-iEt/\hbar} factors out entirely
Superposition of non-degenerate eigenstatesNot stationary; density and observables oscillate at ωmn=(Em−En)/ℏ\omega_{mn}=(E_m-E_n)/\hbarCross terms in ∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2 survive
Explicitly time-dependent H^(t)\hat H(t) (e.g. oscillating laser field)Even "eigenstates" of the instantaneous H^\hat H are not truly stationarySeparation-of-variables derivation assumed H^≠H^(t)\hat H\ne \hat H(t); assumption fails
t→∞t\to\infty limit for a single eigenstate∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2 identical to t=0t=0Phase keeps winding, magnitude never changes — no dephasing, no decay, exactly (in the idealized, isolated system)
Coupling to environment (spontaneous emission, decoherence)"Stationary" states are no longer perfectly stationary; finite lifetime, natural linewidthReal atoms/molecules are not perfectly isolated; H^\hat H implicitly includes coupling to the radiation field, giving EnE_n a small imaginary part −iΓ/2-i\Gamma/2

The chemist behind it

The concept of stationary states traces to Niels Bohr's 1913 postulate that atoms exist only in discrete "stationary states" with fixed energies, radiating only when jumping between them — a bold guess that predated any wave mechanics. It was Erwin Schrödinger who, in 1926, gave the idea rigorous mathematical footing: solving his newly written wave equation showed that the allowed energies of the hydrogen atom emerge naturally as eigenvalues, and that the corresponding eigenfunctions carry exactly the frozen-in-time probability structure that Bohr's stationary states had only been postulated to have. Schrödinger's paper series that year unified Bohr's phenomenological quantization with a genuine differential-equation framework, and it was in this same work that the time-dependent equation and its separation into spatial and temporal pieces — precisely the derivation above — first appeared in essentially modern form.

Origins · 1 minErwin Schrödinger and how this was discovered
ES
Erwin Schrödinger
1887–1961 · Vienna and Zurich, developing wave mechanics 1925–1926

Schrödinger, an Austrian theoretical physicist working largely alone in the winter of 1925–26 (reportedly while on a working holiday in Arosa, Switzerland), sought a wave equation that would reproduce de Broglie's matter-wave hypothesis and Bohr's quantized energy levels from a single unified formalism, rather than a patchwork of quantization rules. His four-part 1926 paper "Quantisierung als Eigenwertproblem" derived the hydrogen spectrum from eigenvalues of a differential operator, introduced the time-dependent generalization, and demonstrated — in the language used throughout this article — that eigenfunctions of the energy operator evolve by nothing more than a spinning phase factor, giving Bohr's stationary states their first fully quantitative, testable mathematical description. He shared the 1933 Nobel Prize in Physics with Paul Dirac for this work.

History
- 1913 — Niels Bohr postulates stationary states of fixed energy in the hydrogen atom, without dynamical justification.
- 1924 — Louis de Broglie proposes matter waves, giving a physical picture for why only certain orbits should be allowed.
- 1926 — Erwin Schrödinger derives the time-independent and time-dependent wave equations and shows stationary states are energy eigenstates with trivial phase evolution.
- 1926 — Max Born proposes the probabilistic interpretation of ∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2, which is what makes "frozen probability density" a physically meaningful statement.
- 1930s onward — Stationary-state language becomes the standard basis for atomic term symbols, molecular orbital theory, and spectroscopic selection rules.
Does "stationary state" mean the electron isn't moving?

No. "Stationary" refers only to the probability density ∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2 being time-independent, not to the electron being at rest. Inside a stationary state the electron can carry nonzero momentum, angular momentum, and even circulating probability current — a 2p+12p_{+1} hydrogen orbital, for example, has a genuinely rotating current pattern even though its density ∣ψ2p+1∣2|\psi_{2p_{+1}}|^2 is perfectly static. The wavefunction's complex phase keeps evolving at rate En/ℏE_n/\hbar, and it is precisely this ongoing phase evolution, combined with the spatial structure of ψn\psi_n, that encodes the dynamical (momentum-like) content without ever showing up in the density itself.

If stationary states never change, how does anything in chemistry ever happen — reactions, spectra, bonding?

Change happens whenever a system is not in a single stationary state, or when the Hamiltonian itself changes in time (a photon arrives, a bond stretches, a nucleus moves). Spectroscopy specifically works by briefly preparing a coherent superposition of two stationary states via light absorption, letting the resulting oscillating dipole moment radiate or absorb energy, and eventually settling into a new single stationary state at the higher or lower energy. So stationary states are not a claim that nothing in chemistry moves — they are the fixed, reusable reference points between which all chemical and photophysical change occurs.

Is the ground state the only stationary state, or are excited states equally stationary?

Every eigenstate of the time-independent Hamiltonian — ground state or however highly excited — is equally stationary in the strict mathematical sense: each has a time-independent probability density and evolves only via its own phase factor e−iEnt/ℏe^{-iE_nt/\hbar}. What makes excited states seem less permanent in real atoms and molecules is coupling to the electromagnetic field (spontaneous emission) or to other degrees of freedom (collisions, solvent), which is physics added on top of the idealized isolated-system Hamiltonian used in the derivation. In a perfectly isolated system with no such coupling, an excited stationary state would last forever, exactly like the ground state.

Why does the probability density stay frozen even though the wavefunction itself is complex and changing?

Because the entire time-dependence of an eigenstate is confined to a single overall phase factor, e−iEnt/ℏe^{-iE_nt/\hbar}, which multiplies the whole spatial function ψn(r⃗)\psi_n(\vec r) uniformly — it does not distort the shape, only rotates the complex "clock hand" representing the wavefunction's phase. When you compute ∣Ψn∣2=Ψn∗Ψn|\Psi_n|^2 = \Psi_n^*\Psi_n, this phase factor and its complex conjugate multiply to exactly 1 everywhere, regardless of how much time has elapsed, because ∣e−iθ∣=1|e^{-i\theta}|=1 for any real angle θ\theta. The wavefunction is genuinely "moving" in the abstract complex-number sense, but that motion is invisible to any measurement built from ∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2.

How does this connect to why atomic and molecular energy levels are quantized?

Quantization of energy is a separate fact, coming from the boundary conditions imposed when solving the The Time-Independent Schrodinger Equation (e.g. requiring ψ→0\psi\to 0 at infinity for a bound particle, or single-valuedness around a ring) — it is what restricts EnE_n to a discrete set in the first place. Stationarity is what you get after you have found such an eigenstate: given any allowed, quantized EnE_n, the corresponding eigenfunction automatically evolves in time via the trivial phase factor described here. So quantization explains which energies are allowed; stationarity explains how the corresponding states behave in time once you have them.

Can a stationary state have a nonzero average momentum or velocity?

For a real-valued, non-degenerate bound-state eigenfunction (like the particle-in-a-box states or the hydrogen nsns states), the expectation value of momentum is always exactly zero, because ⟨p^⟩\langle \hat p\rangle involves an odd-symmetry integral that vanishes for real ψn\psi_n. However, for complex-valued degenerate eigenfunctions — such as the 2p+12p_{+1} or 2p−12p_{-1} hydrogen orbitals, which carry definite orbital angular momentum ml=±1m_l=\pm1 — the expectation value of angular momentum is nonzero and constant in time, even though the state is fully stationary. So "stationary" is fully compatible with nonzero, time-independent averages of momentum-like quantities; it only forbids those averages from changing over time.

What is the relationship between stationary states and the uncertainty principle for energy and time?

A single, pure stationary state has exactly zero uncertainty in energy, ΔE=0\Delta E = 0, since it is an eigenstate of H^\hat H with a single sharp eigenvalue. The energy–time uncertainty relation, ΔE Δt≳ℏ/2\Delta E\,\Delta t \gtrsim \hbar/2, then implies such a state must persist for an infinite characteristic time to be perfectly sharp — consistent with the idea that only genuinely isolated, undecaying eigenstates have perfectly well-defined energy. Real excited states with finite lifetimes τ\tau (due to spontaneous emission or other decay) necessarily have a small but nonzero energy spread ΔE∼ℏ/τ\Delta E \sim \hbar/\tau, manifesting experimentally as the natural linewidth of a spectral transition — a small but measurable departure from perfect stationarity.

Before this

Where this leads