Is This Formula for Spherical Harmonics Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter doubleB
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties and definitions of spherical harmonics, particularly focusing on the relationship between the spherical harmonics Y(l,m) and their complex conjugates. Participants are exploring the correctness of specific formulas and seeking clarification on the underlying concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to verify a formula related to the complex conjugate of spherical harmonics and expresses confusion regarding its implications. Other participants provide properties of spherical harmonics and discuss conventions regarding the definitions and relationships between Y(l,m) and Y(l,-m). Questions arise about the source of the formulas and the correct interpretation of the epsilon function.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the topic, providing various properties and definitions of spherical harmonics. Some guidance has been offered regarding the interpretation of the formulas, but multiple conventions and interpretations are being explored without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of potential discrepancies in the formulas presented, as participants note that different texts may use varying conventions for spherical harmonics. The original poster also mentions uncertainty regarding the accuracy of the formula obtained from lecture notes.

doubleB
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
I've attached the formula as a word document because I think if I try to type it I'll mess it up...
Ok I tried to attach it but apparently it's too big so here goes:

Spherical Harmonics:

The complex conjugate of Y(l,m) = -1 to the power of m MULTIPLIED BY Y(l,m).

Is this right? I thought that this formula would give Y(l,-m)?

I can't find a decent explanation of where all this stuff comes from, I can find an explanation of where Y(l,m) comes from with the Legendre Polynomials etc. However I can't find an explanation for the complex conjugates and for Y(l,-m).

Thank you,

DoubleB
 
Physics news on Phys.org
main properties of Spherical Harmonics

The peculiar properties of Spherical Harmonics are sintetized as follows:

[tex]Y_l ^{-m}=(-1)^m Y_l ^{m\ast}[/tex](orthonormality)

[tex]\int_\Omega Y_{l_1} ^{m_1 \ast}Y_{l_2} ^{m_2} d\Omega=\delta_{l_1 l_2} \delta_{m_1 m_2}[/tex]

[tex]\sum_{m=-l} ^lY_l ^{m\ast}Y_l ^m=1[/tex].

You could also verify these statements from the currently used expression of Spherical Harmonics as:

[tex]Y_l ^{m}(\theta,\varphi)=\epsilon\frac{\sqrt{2l+1}}{\sqrt{4\pi}}\frac{\sqrt{(l-\mid m\mid)!}}{\sqrt{(l+\mid m\mid)!}}P_l^{m}(cos\theta) \exp{(im\varphi)}[/tex]

where
[tex]\epsilon=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}1,&\mbox{ if }<br /> m\leq 0\\(-1)^m, & \mbox{ if } m>0\end{array}\right[/tex]
is a numerical coefficient;

[tex]P_l^{m}(cos\theta)[/tex] represents the associated Legendre polynomials, given by:

[tex]P_l^{m}(cos\theta)=\sin^{\mid m\mid}\theta \frac{d^{\mid m\mid}}{(d\cos)^{\mid m\mid}}P_l(cos\theta)= \frac{1}{2^l l!}\sin^{\mid m\mid}\theta \frac{d^{l+\mid m\mid}}{(d\cos)^{l+\mid m\mid}}(\cos^2\theta -1)^l[/tex]

From these equations you will be able to get you needings. A detailed description would require additional time.

Fran:blushing:
 
Last edited:
doubleB said:
I've attached the formula as a word document because I think if I try to type it I'll mess it up...
Ok I tried to attach it but apparently it's too big so here goes:

Spherical Harmonics:

The complex conjugate of Y(l,m) = -1 to the power of m MULTIPLIED BY Y(l,m).

Is this right? I thought that this formula would give Y(l,-m)?

I can't find a decent explanation of where all this stuff comes from, I can find an explanation of where Y(l,m) comes from with the Legendre Polynomials etc. However I can't find an explanation for the complex conjugates and for Y(l,-m).

Thank you,

DoubleB
What is your reference for your equation (is it taken from a book?). There are several conventions for the overall phase of the Y_lm so this answer may be author dependent. But using the convention that I know (Cilestrino has posted all the main formula), you would indeed have

Y*(l,m) = (-1)^m Y(l,-m)

(the only complex dependence is through e^(i m phi). The only other dependence on m that is relevant is the epsilon factor. Everything else is real and depends only on the absolute value of m.

So you need only to focus on [itex]\epsilon(m) e^{i m \phi}[/itex] where epsilon is defined in Cilestrino's post. Epsilon is real and [itex]\epsilon(-m) =(-1)^m \epsilon(m)[/itex]. So, finally,

[tex](\epsilon(m) e^{i m \phi})^* =\epsilon(m) e^{-i m \phi} = (-1)^m \epsilon(-m) e^{-i m \phi} = (-1)^m Y(l,-m)[/tex]
 
Last edited:
cilestrino said:
The peculiar properties of Spherical Harmonics are sintetized as follows:

[tex]Y_l ^{-m}=(-1)^m Y_l ^{m\ast}[/tex](orthonormality)

[tex]\int_\Omega Y_{l_1} ^{m_1 \ast}Y_{l_2} ^{m_2} d\Omega=\delta_{l_1 l_2} \delta_{m_1 m_2}[/tex]

[tex]\sum_{m=-l} ^lY_l ^{m\ast}Y_l ^m=1[/tex].

You could also verify these statements from the currently used expression of Spherical Harmonics as:

[tex]Y_l ^{m}(\theta,\varphi)=\epsilon\frac{\sqrt{2l+1}}{\sqrt{4\pi}}\frac{\sqrt{(l-\mid m\mid)!}}{\sqrt{(l+\mid m\mid)!}}P_l^{m}(cos\theta) \exp{(im\varphi)}[/tex]

where
[tex]\epsilon=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}1,&\mbox{ if }<br /> m\leq 0\\(-1)^m, & \mbox{ if } m>0\end{array}\right[/tex]
is a numerical coefficient;

[tex]P_l^{m}(cos\theta)[/tex] represents the associated Legendre polynomials, given by:

[tex]P_l^{m}(cos\theta)=\sin^{\mid m\mid}\theta \frac{d^{\mid m\mid}}{(d\cos)^{\mid m\mid}}P_l(cos\theta)= \frac{1}{2^l l!}\sin^{\mid m\mid}\theta \frac{d^{l+\mid m\mid}}{(d\cos)^{l+\mid m\mid}}(\cos^2\theta -1)^l[/tex]

From these equations you will be able to get you needings. A detailed description would require additional time.

Fran:blushing:
This is a good summary, but needs several caveates:
1. The 1st eq. is not "orthonormality". That describes the 2nd eq.
2. The first 3 eqs. are standard, but the others vary from book to book.
I don't think those given here for Plm with negative m are used be most physicists. They are OK if used consistently, though.,
You must be careful in using Ylm to use the same convention throughout.
Almost any Math physics text will give enough Ylm detail.
Beware the web, though.
 
Thanks to Meir Achuz for the correction. I confused the lines after the tex tags!
Fran:blushing:
 
Thanks everyone for the help. Much appreciated.
Just one thing - I'm being a bit stupid - how does e(-m) = -1(m) * e(m) ?
DoubleB
 
Nrged: The formula I got from a page of printed notes from one of my lecturers, it could easily have been wrong I think as they seem to make mistakes often.
When you wrote earlier that e(-m) = -1(m) * e(m), were you saying e to the power of minus m = etc etc?
Are they all to the power of?
Thanks again,
DoubleB
 
doubleB said:
Nrged: The formula I got from a page of printed notes from one of my lecturers, it could easily have been wrong I think as they seem to make mistakes often.
When you wrote earlier that e(-m) = -1(m) * e(m), were you saying e to the power of minus m = etc etc?
Are they all to the power of?
Thanks again,
DoubleB
You mean when I wrote [itex]\epsilon(-m) = (-1)^m \epsilon(m)[/itex]?

when I write [itex]\epsilon(m)[/itex], what I mean is that epsilon can be seen as a function of m. So the (m) is just there to remind us that epsilon depends on m. So the above equation means that epsilon of minus m is equal to -1 raised to the mth power times epsilon of m.

The reason for this is in the definition of epsilon (see Cilestrino's post). For negative m, epsilon is +1. For positive m, epsilon is. (-1)^m. So it is ether +1 (is m is even) or -1 (if n is odd).

So if n is even, epsilon(-m) = epsilon(m) (no change since they are both +1)

If n is odd, then epsilon(-m) and epsilon(m) will differ by a minus sign.

All this is summarized by [itex]\epsilon(-m) = (-1)^m \epsilon(m)[/itex].

Hope this makes sense.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K