Adding Spin S1 and S2: A Puzzling Situation

  • Thread starter Thread starter dsr39
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spin
dsr39
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I am reading the section in Griffiths' Quantum about adding spins together. It says if you have a particle of spin s1 and another of spin s2 then the possible composite spins are

s1+s2, s1+s2 -1, s1+s2-2, ... |s1-s2|

that rule (though not proven in this text) has seemed straight forward to me until now. I have a particle of spin 1/2 and a particle of spin 3/2, so I get

5/2, 3/2 ... but then the situation of them aligning antiparallel 3/2-1/2 = 1 does not occur as one of the integer steps, so do I include it as a possibility? It seems strange that the anti parallel arrangement should not be a possibility.

Thanks for the help

UPDATE:

3/2+1/2 = 2 not 2.5

One day I will figure out how to add those fractions together
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
dsr39 said:
I have a particle of spin 1/2 and a particle of spin 3/2, so I get

5/2, 3/2 ...

How?
 
That is a very good question. Thank you
 
Am I banned for asking that? I understand if so
 
We all make these obvious mistakes sometimes. Don't worry about it. ;)
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top