Angular momentum quantum numbers

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationships between angular momentum quantum numbers j, l, and s, specifically focusing on the values of their corresponding magnetic quantum numbers m_j, m_l, and m_s. Participants explore the conditions under which these values can coexist and the implications of their magnitudes.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether it must be true that m_s, m_l < m_j, suggesting an assumption that m_s + m_l = m_j.
  • Another participant counters that it is not generally true, emphasizing that m values can be positive or negative and providing an example where m_l can exceed m_j.
  • A participant clarifies their intent to discuss the magnitudes of m_s and m_l, proposing that |m_s|, |m_l| ≤ |m_j|, and presents specific cases to illustrate their point.
  • Another participant argues that there are states where |m_j| can be smaller than |m_s| or |m_l|, citing vector analysis principles to support their claim.
  • One participant elaborates on the possible values of m_j for a given j and discusses the ambiguity in determining m_l and m_s when m_j = ±1/2, providing examples of valid combinations.
  • A later reply explains that the state with m_j = -1/2 can be represented as a linear combination of two states, referencing Clebsch-Gordan coefficients for clarification.
  • Another participant adds that there are additional j=3/2 states arising from different l values, noting that not all combinations yield allowed m_j values.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationships between the magnetic quantum numbers, with no consensus reached on the conditions governing their magnitudes and combinations.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss specific cases and examples, but the discussion includes unresolved assumptions about the relationships between the quantum numbers and their implications in different scenarios.

BeauGeste
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
For angular momentum quantum numbers j, l, and s must it be true that [tex]m_s, m_l < m_j[/tex]?
It would seem that it is true because I assume that [tex]m_s +m_l = m_j[/tex], but I have not actually seen that written down anywhere and am curious.
Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No. It is not generally true. Remember that m tells you the component of angular momentum along some certain direction. This means that it can be either positive or negative. Consider, then, the case where [tex]m_s = -\frac{1}{2}[/tex]. It is hopefully clear that [tex]m_l = m_j + \frac{1}{2}[/tex].
 
ok, I think I meant the magnitude of the m's. i.e.
[tex]|m_s|, |m_l| \leq |m_j|[/tex].
For example, take the situation where [tex]m_j = -1/2[/tex], j=3/2, s=1/2. The orbital and spin angular momenta magnetic numbers can add to this for two cases:
1. [tex]m_s = -1/2, m_l = 0[/tex].
2. [tex]m_s = 1/2, m_l = -1[/tex].
I would argue from above that case 2 is not a viable option because [tex]|m_l| \nleq |m_j|[/tex].
What do you think?
 
Last edited:
If you're using magnitudes, you can't have negative numbers. However, even if you want to compare the magnitudes of [tex]m_s[/tex], [tex]m_l[/tex], and [tex]m_j[/tex], you'll find that there are states where [tex]|m_j|[/tex] is smaller than either [tex]|m_s|[/tex] or [tex]|m_l|[/tex]. All this requires is that the spin and orbital angular momenta have their z components in opposite directions. This is something we should expect from normal vector analysis (i.e. it has nothing to do with quantum mechanics specifically). If I add two vectors which have projections in opposite directions along the z-axis, I should expect that the magnitude of the z component of the resultant vector must be smaller than at least that of one of the two vectors I added; and, it may be smaller than both.
 
darn, I wrote that wrong. Hopefully this makes my question more clear:

if j=3/2 then possible [tex]m_j[/tex] values are -3/2 to 3/2 by ones. if j=3/2 and we're dealing with an electron then l = 1 and s = 1/2. [tex]m_l[/tex] values are 1,0, and -1.
If [tex]m_j = - 3/2 (+3/2)[/tex] then of course [tex]m_l = -1 (+1)[/tex] and [tex]m_s = -1/2 (+1/2)[/tex] respectively. Those are the only possibilities to form [tex]m_j[/tex] for the maximum values of [tex]m_j[/tex].
Now when [tex]m_j = \pm 1/2[/tex] it seems ambiguous as to what [tex]m_{l,s}[/tex] are. For instance:
1. [tex]m_s = -1/2, m_l = 0[/tex]
2. [tex]m_s = 1/2, m_l = -1[/tex]
both give [tex]m_j = -1/2[/tex].

Is that ok or is one of them not correct?
 
BeauGeste said:
1. [tex]m_s = -1/2, m_l = 0[/tex]
2. [tex]m_s = 1/2, m_l = -1[/tex]
both give [tex]m_j = -1/2[/tex].

The state with [itex]m_j = -1/2[/itex] is a linear combination of the two states with [itex](m_s = -1/2, m_l = 0)[/itex] and [itex](m_s = +1/2, m_l = -1)[/itex]. The coefficients of the linear combination are called Clebsch-Gordan coefficients:

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/qm/lectures/node47.html

To relate the notation on that page to your example, substitute [itex]l[/itex] for its [itex]j_1[/itex], [itex]s[/itex] for its [itex]j_2[/itex], [itex]m_l[/itex] for its [itex]m_1[/itex], [itex]m_s[/itex] for its [itex]m_2[/itex], and finally [itex]m_j[/itex] for its [itex]m[/itex].
 
BeauGeste said:
darn, I wrote that wrong. Hopefully this makes my question more clear:

if j=3/2 then possible [tex]m_j[/tex] values are -3/2 to 3/2 by ones. if j=3/2 and we're dealing with an electron then l = 1 and s = 1/2. [tex]m_l[/tex] values are 1,0, and -1.
If [tex]m_j = - 3/2 (+3/2)[/tex] then of course [tex]m_l = -1 (+1)[/tex] and [tex]m_s = -1/2 (+1/2)[/tex] respectively. Those are the only possibilities to form [tex]m_j[/tex] for the maximum values of [tex]m_j[/tex].
Now when [tex]m_j = \pm 1/2[/tex] it seems ambiguous as to what [tex]m_{l,s}[/tex] are. For instance:
1. [tex]m_s = -1/2, m_l = 0[/tex]
2. [tex]m_s = 1/2, m_l = -1[/tex]
both give [tex]m_j = -1/2[/tex].

Is that ok or is one of them not correct?

Adding to what jtbell said, you should also be aware that there are [tex]j=3/2[/tex] states arising from [tex]l=2,\ s=1/2[/tex]. Here, there are 10 possible [tex]|m_l, m_s\!\!>[/tex] states; but, only 8 of them give allowed values of [tex]m_j[/tex].
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K