If this is supposed to be the probability density then it looks way off. I suspect that there is a mistake in calculating the absolute value of the wave function.
Edit: In this base the absolute value of the wave function is supposed to be rotational symmetric around the z axis.
Yes, judging from a quick look at the code (and not being familiar with the GiNaC library used) this seems to square the wave function instead of squaring the absolute value.
If the wavefunction is supposed to have n,l,m quantum numbers (as suggested by the interface) then yes, it should be rotationally symmetric around the z axis.
Comments
If this is supposed to be the probability density then it looks way off. I suspect that there is a mistake in calculating the absolute value of the wave function.
Edit: In this base the absolute value of the wave function is supposed to be rotational symmetric around the z axis.
Yes, judging from a quick look at the code (and not being familiar with the GiNaC library used) this seems to square the wave function instead of squaring the absolute value.
[1] https://github.com/c0nrad/hydrogen/blob/master/hydrogen.cpp#...
At a first glance, there seems to be something wonky with the quantum numbers: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/qunoh.html
Why? The PDE should be Psi^2 no? (which is what it's being plotted)
For the D orbital?
The phi-dependence of the wave-functions are exp(i m phi), it has magnitude 1. |Psi|^2 = conj(Psi)*Psi, the phi-dependency cancels out.
If the wavefunction is supposed to have n,l,m quantum numbers (as suggested by the interface) then yes, it should be rotationally symmetric around the z axis.