Fermions in bound states and their wavefunctions

ZombieCat
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

This may be my very first post on Physics Forums. I am a 1st year physics grad student and need some help on something that's been bugging me. Suppose we have two spin half particles in a bound state. The total spin will either be 0 or 1. The spin 0 state, for example, would be symmetric (even parity right?) so it would need an antisymmetric spatial wavefunction to make the overall wavefunction antisymmetric since we have fermions? But then I thought the overall wavefunction may be symmetric because the total spin is that of a boson?

Rephrased, my question is this: would the total wavefunction have to be antisymmetric since we are dealing with fermions, or would it be symmetric since the total spin is that of a boson?
Which is it and why?

If we came along and didn't know that there were two fermions in there would we think it was a boson?

Does the fermions being in a bound state matter? What about the shape of the potential?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Hello ZombieCat! Welcome to PF! :smile:
ZombieCat said:
Hello all,

This may be my very first post on Physics Forums.

uhhh? :confused: did you use to be Schrodinger's cat? :biggrin:
… Rephrased, my question is this: would the total wavefunction have to be antisymmetric since we are dealing with fermions, or would it be symmetric since the total spin is that of a boson?
Which is it and why?

If we came along and didn't know that there were two fermions in there would we think it was a boson?

It's symmetric because it is a boson …

a bound state of an even number of fermions is a boson.

That's why mesons are bosons, but protons and neutrons are fermions … they're two quarks and three quarks respectively! :wink:
 
ZombieCat said:
Suppose we have two spin half particles in a bound state. The total spin will either be 0 or 1. The spin 0 state, for example, would be symmetric (even parity right?)
Sorry, wrong. The spin-0 state is antisymmetric, and the spin-1 state is symmetric.
 


Haha! I guess this zombie cat USED to be Schrodinger's cat, but is now the quantum mechanically undead. Thanks Tiny Tim!

As for the symmetry of the spin-0 state, (ud-du)/sqrt(2), I understand that the spins are opposed to make this happen and this state should be antisymmetric... I guess I'm getting confused about the difference between symmetry and parity, (-1)^L. Does this not apply here? Why not?
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top