Relative intensities of Zeeman components

Acetylene5
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi-

I'm trying to calculate the effect of a magnetic field on some spectral lines. I know that each energy level will split into 2J+1 sub levels (each denoted by Mj). I can calculate the energy level splitting and using the selection rules (dJ = 0, +/-1, dMj = 0, +/-1, dL = 0, +/-1), I can figure out which transitions are allowed electric dipoles. I know that the pi components (dMj = 0) are not emitted parallel to the magnetic field, while the sigma components (dMj = +/- 1) can be seen in both parallel and transverse directions.

So, I think I can calculate the zeeman splitting alright, but the problem arises when I try to calculate the relative intensities of each of the zeeman components. I found some relevant equations in Condon and Shortley's Theory of Atomic Spectra (Chapter 16, section 4), but I don't think I'm interpreting it right. It's been a while since I had a quantum class, so it's possible I'm forgetting something stupid.

"For the Zeeman pattern of any line in which there is no change in J, the strengths of the components in transverse observation are proportional to:
| < alpha J M| P | alpha' J M> |^2 = |<alpha J| P | alpha' J>|^2 M^2 (pi)
1/4*|<alpha J M | P | alpha' J M -/+ 1>|^2 = |<alpha J| P |alpha' J>|^2 1/4 (J +/- M)(J -/+ M+1) (sigma)

There are different (but very similar) formulas for delta J = +1, and -1, but I'm not going to type them out here (I can if others would find it useful).

My problem is when delta Mj = 0, and Mj = 0 as well. Does this mean that since Mj = 0, the pi component is not allowed? To put it another way, when the proportionality factor = zero, is that component forbidden? It doesn't seem to make sense, as you'd be missing the central pi component completely from both the transverse and longitudinal spectra.

I know there's a selection rule against delta J = 0 when J =0, but i didn't think that prohibited Mj from being zero when delta J = 0.

Where am I going wrong?

Thanks,
C.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here's an update for anyone who's looking for an answer... It turns out that if the relative intensity = 0, then that Zeeman component does not appear. In effect, it's not allowed. Hope this helps.
 
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!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
26
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top