Angular momentum in a rectangular box

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the conservation of angular momentum in a classical particle within a three-dimensional box, contrasting it with a spherical potential well. Participants are exploring the conditions under which angular momentum may or may not be conserved based on the geometry of the potential well and the forces acting on the particle.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the implications of the box's geometry on angular momentum conservation, particularly regarding the forces exerted by the walls. There is also a discussion about the conditions under which the particle's interaction with the walls affects angular momentum.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the relationship between the forces acting on the particle and angular momentum conservation, suggesting that the nature of the forces (central vs. non-central) plays a crucial role. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of these forces on the system's overall angular momentum.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the potential well's definition and the conditions under which the particle's angular momentum is considered conserved or not, depending on its interaction with the box's walls. The discussion also touches on the Schrödinger equation and its implications for energy and angular momentum states.

Mjolnir
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
This is more of a conceptual question. I'm looking for a "physical argument" as to why the angular momentum of a classical particle about the center of a 3d box wouldn't be conserved, as opposed to spherical well in which orbital angular momentum is a constant.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mjolnir said:
This is more of a conceptual question. I'm looking for a "physical argument" as to why the angular momentum of a classical particle about the center of a 3d box wouldn't be conserved, as opposed to spherical well in which orbital angular momentum is a constant.

It depends what you mean by this. What are the forces on the particle? I am not sure if you mean a physical 3 d box which has a a gravitational pull on the particle, if the particle is inside or outside of the box, etc.

(nice handle...Thor's hammer if I remmeber correctly)
 
by a 3d box I mean a potential well such that V(x,y,z) = 0 for -a/2 < x < a/2, -b/2 < y < b/2, and -c/2 < z < c/2; or V -> infinity otherwise

edit: glad you like the screen name :-)
 
Mjolnir said:
by a 3d box I mean a potential well such that V(x,y,z) = 0 for -a/2 < x < a/2, -b/2 < y < b/2, and -c/2 < z < c/2; or V -> infinity otherwise

edit: glad you like the screen name :-)

But then the angular momentum is conserved as long as the particle does not touch the sides of the box, trivially.
If the particle bounces on the sides, then angular momentum is not conserved because the force exerted by the walls is not a central force (it's not along th eradius). Therefore, the change of momentum is not along the radius an dthe angular momentum is not conserved.

You can see this easily if you imagine the box to have a finite mass. when the particle bounces, the box would start to spin. Of course, the angular momentum of the combined system (box plus particle) would be conserved.
 
To expand on this a bit, how would one go about using the time-independent Schrödinger equation to prove that there are no states with both definite energy and definite orbital angular momentum magnitude?
 
Mjolnir said:
To expand on this a bit, how would one go about using the time-independent Schrödinger equation to prove that there are no states with both definite energy and definite orbital angular momentum magnitude?

Well, one way is to write the energy eigenfunctions (which are easy to write down since they are products of sine function) and then to apply the angular momentum square operator and show that these states are not eigenstates of L^2.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K