Undergrad Exchange symmetry of two particles on a sphere

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the symmetry properties of two identical spin-zero particles on a sphere, particularly regarding their exchange symmetry when considering their total orbital angular momentum. It examines the implications of the combined angular momentum quantum number, L = 1, and contrasts the results from parity considerations and Clebsch-Gordan coefficients. The parity argument suggests antisymmetry for L = 1, while the Clebsch-Gordan approach indicates symmetry for states in the highest weight tuple. The disagreement arises due to the condition l1 ≠ l2, complicating the symmetry analysis. Ultimately, the symmetry under interchange of the particles is influenced by the properties of the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients, while parity symmetry is determined by the overall particle interchange.
Siupa
Messages
30
Reaction score
5
Consider a system of two identical spin zero particles on a sphere. Let ##\vec{L} = \vec{L}_1 + \vec{L}_2## be the total orbital angular momentum of the two particles, and ##l_1, l_2## be the orbital angular momentum quantum numbers corresponding to particle 1 and particle 2.

Consider the simultaneous eigenstates of ##L^2, L_z## with ##l_1 + l_2 = 1##.

Are these states symmetric or anti-symmetric under particle exchange?

Now, the combined angular momentum quantum number for these states is ##L = 1##.

On one hand, ##(-1)^L## would tell me that they're antisimmetric for ##L = 1## (although this actually refers to parity, not particle exchange. But often these are related)

On the other hand, the symmetry properties of Clebsch-Gordan coefficients would tell me that any state in the highest weight tuple is always symmetric under particles exchange, by ##(-1)^{j_1 + j_2 - J}## with ##j_1 + j_2 = l_1 + l_2 = 1## and ##J = L = 1##.

Which one is the correct approach?

There's a similar question here, but it only deals with the case ##l_1 = l_2##, where the argument from parity and the argument from Clebsch-Gordan agree and give the same symmetry properties. However, in this case we must have ##l_1 \neq l_2##, and this seems to make the two approaches disagree.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The states are defined in terms of the tensor product of the single particle states, $$\mathbf{l}_1\otimes\mathbf{l}_2$$ This space has ##(2l_1+1)(2l_2+1)## vectors. Selecting combinations that are eigenvectors of ##L^2## and ##L_z## is done with the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients. The symmetry under interchange of the two particles is therefore determined by the symmetry of these coefficients. With more than two particles, this symmetry may be mixed.

That said, the symmetry under parity is determined by the interchange of ##x \rightarrow -x## for all particles at once. This should be ##(-)^{l_1}(-)^{l_2}##.
 
I am slowly going through the book 'What Is a Quantum Field Theory?' by Michel Talagrand. I came across the following quote: One does not" prove” the basic principles of Quantum Mechanics. The ultimate test for a model is the agreement of its predictions with experiments. Although it may seem trite, it does fit in with my modelling view of QM. The more I think about it, the more I believe it could be saying something quite profound. For example, precisely what is the justification of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
965
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
447
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K