Question about quantum numbers:

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of quantum numbers and the Pauli exclusion principle (PEP) in systems of identical fermions, particularly focusing on hydrogen and helium atoms. Participants explore how the spatial separation of fermions affects their quantum states and the conditions under which their wavefunctions must be antisymmetrized.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that two electrons in separate hydrogen atoms can share the same set of quantum numbers due to their spatial separation.
  • Others argue that in a helium atom, the two electrons must have different quantum numbers because they are identical fermions and must obey the PEP.
  • A participant questions how close two electrons must be for their wavefunctions to overlap significantly enough to require antisymmetrization.
  • One participant suggests that the quantum state includes the spatial part of the wavefunction, which may influence the application of the PEP.
  • Another participant describes a model using a double well system to illustrate how the energy levels and states of fermions change as they come closer together, emphasizing the role of antisymmetry.
  • Some participants discuss the idea that even when fermions are far apart, their wavefunctions must still be symmetrized, raising questions about the practical implications of this in measurements.
  • There is a mention of the concept that all electrons are excitations of a single electron field, which contributes to their antisymmetric nature.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of quantum numbers and the PEP, particularly regarding the conditions under which antisymmetrization becomes significant. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the quantum numbers are origin-dependent, and the discussion includes assumptions about wavefunction overlap and the nature of fermionic states that may not be fully clarified.

VortexLattice
Messages
140
Reaction score
0
So, you got n,l,m_l,m_s. If you have two hydrogen atoms on opposite ends of the universe, it seems to me that the electron in each could have the set of quantum numbers (1,0,0,1/2).

Now, if you have a helium atom, because its two electrons are identical fermions, by the PEP they now "know" about each other, and can't have the same set of quantum numbers... So how close do two electrons have to get before this happens?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have been wondering this same thing! Yet I still haven't gotten a straight answer from anyone.
 
My friend thinks it's that the "same quantum state" includes the spatial part of the function as well, which kind of makes sense. But I'm still not convinced.
 
The quantum numbers n, l, ml, ms are origin-dependent, and so the states labeled by these numbers for atom 1 are not the same states as the ones labelled by the same numbers for atom2.

The antisymmetry is completely unimportant as long as the atoms are far enough apart that the wavefunctions barely overlap. Bring them closely together (an atomic diameter, say) and the fact that the total wavefunction must be antisymmetric starts to matter.
 
Bill_K said:
The antisymmetry is completely unimportant as long as the atoms are far enough apart that the wavefunctions barely overlap. Bring them closely together (an atomic diameter, say) and the fact that the total wavefunction must be antisymmetric starts to matter.

This has always bothered me though. How does Pauli "know" when the critical overlap is!? There is always finite overlap, however minuscule. How does more overlap work it's way into symmetrization?
 
In place of the 3-D atoms, consider a simpler case: the double well, a pair of identical 1-D wells a distance R apart. This is a standard example covered in QM courses. When the wells are far apart the energy levels are essentially the same as for a single well, and the states are essentially independent of each other. Each well appears to be occupied as if the other did not exist. There's a twofold degeneracy.

But in reality there's a single wavefunction for both wells, and the true eigenstates are symmetric and antisymmetric. And each level that appeared to be twofold degenerate is slightly split: the symmetric function has one fewer node, and is therefore slightly lower in energy than the antisymmetric one. As the wells are moved closer together this difference becomes more and more noticeable. Very crudely, the increase in energy for the antisymmetric state can be thought of as a 'repulsion' caused by the Pauli principle.

Now if the particle occupying the wells is a fermion, the antisymmetric states are the only ones, and the wavefunction is always antisymmetric. For large R the effect of this (the energy level shift) is small and the wells appear to be independently occupied. But as R is decreased the Pauli effect becomes more and more noticeable.
 
So while it might seem pedantic, the wavefunction for a two fermion system, even when the fermions are far apart, must still be symmetrerized? If I had the technological power to build a machine, I could measure a difference in the quantum numbers of two fermions a meter apart because of spin-statistics and quantum number splitting?
 
Yes in principle, there is only one electron field, and every electron in the universe is an excitation of that field and is antisymmetric with every other one. :cool:
 
Thank you :approve:
 
  • #10
Bill_K said:
Yes in principle, there is only one electron field, and every electron in the universe is an excitation of that field and is antisymmetric with every other one. :cool:

http://mlkshk.com/r/DBLT
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K