Bizzard measurement outcome of Angular Momentum, Why?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the measurement of angular momentum in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing the behavior of the z-component L(z) and its relationship to the x and y components L(x) and L(y). When L(z) is known, L(x) and L(y) do not have definite values due to the uncertainty principle and the commutation relations between these observables. The de Broglie-Bohm interpretation provides clarity by asserting that particles have well-defined trajectories and that angular momentum is quantized based on the wave function's eigenstates. The mathematical expressions for L(x) and L(y) are provided, illustrating their dependence on the angle θ.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly angular momentum.
  • Familiarity with the uncertainty principle and commutation relations.
  • Knowledge of the de Broglie-Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics.
  • Basic mathematical skills to interpret wave functions and eigenstates.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the uncertainty principle in detail to grasp its implications on quantum measurements.
  • Explore the de Broglie-Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics for alternative perspectives on particle behavior.
  • Learn about angular momentum operators and their eigenvalues in quantum mechanics.
  • Investigate the mathematical formulation of wave functions and their role in defining quantum states.
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in quantum mechanics, physicists interested in interpretations of quantum theory, and anyone seeking to understand the complexities of angular momentum measurements in quantum systems.

wam_mi
Messages
78
Reaction score
1
Hi there,

I am just a bit confused about the measurement of angular momentum.
If we have a state which we know for sure the outcome of the measurement of L(z), the z-component of the angular momentum L, say h. Why is it that all the other components, say L(x) would not reveal itself to have a definite value, but instead there is a probability (but not for sure) of getting one of the eigenvalues of L(x)...

This concept is very bizzard and I don't really know what I'm talking about... has it got something to do with the uncertainty principle and the commutation relations between the two observables?

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
As I wrote in response to some thread the other day:

The answer to this in orthodox QM is not defined, since it rejects as meaningless any attempt to understand the reality of a quantum event. You simple have to accept the mathematics and 'shut up and calculate'.

However, in the de Broglie-Bohm interpretation of QM (merely a minor shift in perspective), the answer is straightforward. Particles have trajectories, pushed around by an objectively existing wave field represented mathematically by the wave function. And orbital angular momentum really is the angular momentum of particles 'orbiting' the nucleus. Of course this is a bit difficult if you believe that particles only exist when you look at them (as in the orthodox view).

Why is it quantized? In de Broglie-Bohm theory quantities are well-defined and continuously variable for all quantum states - values for the subset of wave functions which are eigenstates of some operator have no fundamental physical significance. So this characteristic feature of QM - the existence of discrete energy levels - is due to the restriction of a basically continuous theory to motion associated with a subclass of eigenfunctions.

Now what happens with angular momentum? Let's say we prepare the system with a wave function which is an eigenfunction of the [tex]{\hat L}_z[/tex] operator (where the direction of the z-axis is arbitrary). Then the z component of the angular momentum will coincide with the eigenvalue of [tex]{\hat L}_z[/tex] , and the total orbital angular momentum with the eigenvalue of [tex]{\hat L}^2[/tex] . Conventionally one would say that the x- and y- components are 'undefined'. However, in de Broglie-Bohm they are perfectly well-defined. In fact you have:

[tex]L_x= -m \hbar \cot \theta \cos \theta[/tex]

[tex]L_y = m\hbar \cot \theta \sin \theta[/tex]

[tex]L_z = m\hbar[/tex]

So the difference is that along the trajectory [tex]L_z[/tex] and the total angular momentum are conserved, but [tex]L_x[/tex] and [tex]L_y[/tex] are not. Thus, although the classical force is central the motion is asymmetrical, which reflects the fact that a particular direction in space has been singled out as the quantization axis.

And if you'll forgive me correcting your English, I believe the word is 'bizarre' not 'bizzard'.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K