How do i get the singlet state?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kingmob
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Singlet State
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation and understanding of the singlet and triplet states in a two-electron system, focusing on the mathematical and conceptual aspects of angular momentum addition. Participants explore the definitions, properties, and methods to arrive at these states, including the application of operators and the implications of orthogonality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about deriving the singlet and triplet states, noting that while they understand the orthogonality, they struggle with the underlying concepts.
  • Another participant suggests that the singlet state is invariant under rotations, implying that orthogonality is key to identifying it.
  • A different participant asserts that the states are correct as they are eigenfunctions of the total spin operators with the appropriate eigenvalues.
  • One participant references the Fundamental Theorem for the Addition of Angular Momentum, indicating that understanding this theorem is crucial for grasping the case of two spin-1/2 particles.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of using established texts rather than personal interpretations of the Clebsch-Gordan theorem.
  • Further elaboration is provided on the specific case of two spin-1/2 particles, detailing the dimensionality of the space and the corresponding eigenvectors for the singlet and triplet states.
  • Participants discuss the application of lowering operators to derive the triplet states and confirm the orthogonality of the singlet state to these triplet states.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the derivation of the singlet state, with some agreeing on the importance of orthogonality and the application of operators, while others remain uncertain about the overall clarity of the concepts involved. No consensus is reached on the specific difficulties faced in understanding the singlet state.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential gaps in the participants' assumptions about the mathematical framework and the definitions of the states. The discussion also highlights the reliance on established theorems and texts, which may not be universally accessible or understood by all participants.

kingmob
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
In all my books the singlet and triplet state of a two-electron system seem to be postulated as obvious. The problem is that the sollutions somehow aren't obvious to me at all. I can see i can derive the s=1 states by applying a lowering operator to |s=1,m=1> =|++> But it doesn't help me in my understanding of the matter.
Also, i can see that the singlet state is orthogonal to the other states, but this doesn't help me get to it myself.
What is the thing I'm missing here?

For completeness:
singlet:
[tex]|s=0,m=0> = \frac {1} {\sqrt{2}}(|+-> - |-+>)[/tex]

Triplet:
[tex]|s=1,m=1> = |++>[/tex]
[tex]|s=1,m=0> = \frac {1} {\sqrt{2}}(|+-> + |-+>)[/tex]
[tex]|s=1,m=-1> = |-->[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The whole point is that the singlet state is invariant under "rotations", unlike the triplet state. So invoking orthogonality is the only way to find it, I believe.
 
These states are the right states, because they are eigenfunctions of S=S1+S2 and S^2 with the right eigenvalues. (Check it).
 
kingmob said:
In all my books the singlet and triplet state of a two-electron system seem to be postulated as obvious. The problem is that the sollutions somehow aren't obvious to me at all.

... What is the thing I'm missing here?
Have you looked at a proof of

the FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM for the ADDITION OF ANGULAR MOMENTUM[/color] ?

This is how the theorem goes:

In the (2j1+1)(2j2+1)-dimensional space spanned by the vectors |j1,m1>|j2,m2> (with j1,j2 fixed, and m1,m2 variable), the possible values of j are

j1+ j2 , j1+ j2-1 , ... , |j1- j2| ,

and to each of these values there corresponds one, and only one, sequence of 2j+1 eigenvectors |j,mj> , mj = -j,...,j .[/color]

For the answer to you your question, all you need to do is understand the case in which j1 = j2 = 1/2 .
 
The theorem of Clebsch-Gordan has other text.Please refer from using approximate (personally interpreted) formulations.Just pick a book.

Daniel.
 
Eye_in_the_Sky said:
Have you looked at ...

... For the answer to you your question, all you need to do is understand the case in which j1 = j2 = 1/2
What does the theorem look like for the case j1 = j2 = ½ ? It looks like:

In the 4-dimensional space spanned by the vectors |j1=½,m1>|j2=½,m2> (with m1,m2 = ± ½), the possible values of j are

1,0 ,

and to the j=1 value there corresponds one, and only one, sequence of 3 eigenvectors |1,1>, |1,0>, |1,-1>, and to the j=0 value there corresponds one, and only one, sequence consisting of a single eigenvector |0,0>.[/color]

The members of a given sequence are related to one another by means of the raising or lowering operators. That is, for example, using the lowering operator J, we have for the j=1 sequence

J|1,1> = √2 |1,0> ,

J|1,0> = √2 |1,-1> ,

J|1,-1> = 0 ;

whereas, for the j=0 sequence, we have

J|0,0> = 0 .

These four |j,m> vectors form an orthonormal basis of the 4-dimensional joint spin-space. However, an alternative orthonormal basis is given by the original set of vectors { |j1=½,m1>|j2=½,m2> ; m1,m2 = ± ½ }, which in simplified notation is nothing but { |+,+>, |+,->, |-,+>, |-,-> }.

It is trivial to check, and true in general, that the vector |j1,m1>|j2,m2> is an eigenvector of (total) Jz with eigenvalue m=m1+m2. This means that, when each of m1 and m2 takes on its largest allowed value (i.e. m1=j1, m2=j2), then the associated vector must correspond to the |j,m> vector given by |jmax,mmax>. Specifically, for the case at hand, this fact is expressed by

|+,+> ↔ |1,1> .

There is no difficulty in writing the above relationship as an actual equality. Therefore, we can write

|1,1> = |+,+> .

By similar reasoning, we are also able to write

|1,-1> = |-,-> .

Next:
kingmob said:
I can see i can derive the s=1 states by applying a lowering operator to |s=1,m=1> =|++>
So, then you can see

|1,0> = (1/√2) J|1,1>

= (1/√2) ( J1– + J2– ) |+,+>

= (1/√2) ( J1–|+,+> + J2–|+,+> )

= (1/√2) ( |-,+> + |+,-> ) .

We have now, therefore, solved for the triplet.

kingmob said:
Also, i can see that the singlet state is orthogonal to the other states
That's good. We've already used up 3 out of 4 dimensions, and since the normalized vector

(1/√2) ( |-,+> – |+,-> )

is orthogonal to all of the triplets, it must correspond to |0,0>, the singlet.

And we are done.

kingmob said:
... but this doesn't help me get to it myself.
What is the thing I'm missing here?
Do you still feel that something is missing?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K