Adding spin components on different axes x+x=Z?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter chopficaro
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axes Components Spin
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of adding spin components along different axes in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing the counterintuitive nature of spin addition compared to classical vector addition. Participants explore the implications of treating spin as an intrinsic quantum property and its representation through mathematical frameworks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the addition of spin components, suggesting that in classical mechanics, adding opposite spins should yield zero, contrasting this with quantum mechanical treatment.
  • Another participant clarifies that spin is fundamentally different from classical observables and is represented by orthogonal basis vectors, indicating that the angles between them are 90 degrees.
  • A third participant introduces the concept of complex numbers and their utility in encoding symmetry, mentioning spinors and quaternions in relation to the Pauli spin matrices.
  • A later reply indicates a desire for more mathematical content in tutorials on quantum mechanics, expressing disappointment in the lack of mathematical depth in the resources being used.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; there are competing views on the nature of spin and its mathematical representation, with some expressing confusion and others providing clarification.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the limitations in understanding the mathematical formalism behind spin, as well as the dependence on definitions of spin and its representation in quantum mechanics.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in quantum mechanics, particularly those exploring the mathematical foundations of spin and its implications in physics.

chopficaro
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
sqrt(1/2)up = sqrt(1/2)right + sqrt(1/2)left

this is very counter intuitive for me, I am used to normal Cartesian coordinates where u can add and subtract magnitudes in the x-axis all day and get nothing on any other axis. furthermore, a spin to the right should be the opposite of a spin to the left, and so right should equal negative left, and adding the same magnitude of each should give u ZERO!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
chopficaro said:
sqrt(1/2)up = sqrt(1/2)right + sqrt(1/2)left

this is very counter intuitive for me, I am used to normal Cartesian coordinates where u can add and subtract magnitudes in the x-axis all day and get nothing on any other axis. furthermore, a spin to the right should be the opposite of a spin to the left, and so right should equal negative left, and adding the same magnitude of each should give u ZERO!

Spin is a fundamentally different entity from classical observables, and is treated in standard non-relativistic Q.M. as an intrinsic quantum mechanical quality of particles that cannot be represented in position space. So the "right" and "left" referred to in your equation above do not refer to opposite directions on some Cartesian axis. In fact, they are orthogonal basis vectors, so that means that the angle between them is actually 90 degrees.

I know that this is rather non-intuitive at first, since you probably started out talking about things as projections of the spin vector on various space-fixed Cartesian axes. However it is all consistent. You might want to google "Pauli spin matrices" if you are interested in the mathematical formalism behind this.
 
Remember that there are 2 possible values to a square root: one positive and the other negative, with the same absolute value, though for simple calculations we often neglect the negative value. This gives us a really handy way to encode positions or times for instance involving symmetry.

A complex number is the standard way to take advantage of coding those types of symmetry in one or two dimensions. A spinor or a quaterion (which the Pauli spin matrices are associated with) does the same thing in additional dimensions.
 
Last edited:
ty i understand more, I am watching some tutorial videos on quantum mechanics but they aren't going over any of the math. i have a very robust history in math so I am a little disappointed. when i finish my tutorials i will look up those matrices
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K