Missing something pretty simple in counting energy levels?

genericusrnme
Messages
618
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


Determine the no. of energy levels with different values of total spin for a system of N particles with spin 1/2

The Attempt at a Solution


Let f be the no. ways to get a z projection of spin, then

f(\sigma )=Binomial(N,\frac{1}{2}N + \sigma)
Where Binomial(a,b) is a chose b

That part makes perfect sense
To each energy level with a given S there corresponds 2S+1 states with σ=S...-S
Again, I know this
Hence it is easy to see that the no. different energy levels with a given value of S are

n(S)=f(s)-f(s+1)

And that is where it lost me, I don't understand why this is and I feel like I'm missing something simple..

Could anyone offer any help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How exactly does the Hamiltonian depend on spin here? It seems you'd have to know that to be able to count the number of energy levels.
 
vela said:
How exactly does the Hamiltonian depend on spin here? It seems you'd have to know that to be able to count the number of energy levels.

There's no mention of the hamiltonian at all.

What I quoted in the problem statement was everything that I'm given in the problem and, unless I've missed something, there has been no mention of any assumptions being made about the hamiltionian up to this point.

It's at the end of a section that told of how to use youngs diagrams and symmetries of the coordinate and spin wavefunctions under permutations so I'm guessing I have to use that but I'm really not following.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top