Space quantization of electron orbits ?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of orbital quantum numbers (l) and their relationship with magnetic fields in quantum mechanics. It is established that the angles between the orbital quantum number and the magnetic field cannot be 0 or π degrees, as this would lead to non-integral magnetic quantum numbers and imply circular orbits, which contradicts the elliptical nature of orbits under central force fields. The conversation emphasizes that in quantum mechanics, the concept of precise orbits is invalid, and the measurement of angular momentum components is subject to non-commutativity, making it impossible to ascertain all components simultaneously.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with orbital quantum numbers and magnetic quantum numbers
  • Knowledge of angular momentum in quantum systems
  • Concept of non-commutativity in quantum measurements
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of angular momentum quantization in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the role of magnetic fields in quantum measurements
  • Explore the concept of wave functions and their relation to electron orbits
  • Investigate the non-commutativity of quantum operators and its effects on measurement
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics, as well as educators looking to clarify concepts related to electron behavior in magnetic fields.

mkbh_10
Messages
217
Reaction score
0
The values of theta that represent the angle b/w orbital quantum no. (l) & magnetic field direction can never by pi or 0 deg as then the magnetic quantum no . will have non integral values & and also the direction of orbital quantum no . & magnetic field will be parallel which means the electron will have circular orbit which is not possible as a particle under the action of a central force field has elliptical orbit . No cone around the magnetic field will be traced out . Is my reasoning correct ??
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Will sum1 ans this ??
 
Some issues:
Circles are ellipses so I don't understand your argument on that point.

You're talking quantum theory so "elliptical orbits" is also meaningless in this context. The quantum description precludes constantly knowing the exact position over time and saying this follows any specific orbit. [Else you'd also know the momentum or you'd have to make the mass variable and you'd no longer have an "electron".]

You're talking quantum mechanics so it is improper to speak of "the direction of the orbital quantum number [tex]\ell[/tex]" as if it is an observable. You pick a direction to measure and in that direction you measure a component [tex]\ell[/tex]. There is no reason you can't (in principle) decide to measure the component in line with a specific magnetic field. (As a practical matter you usually use magnetic fields to measure this so this is problematic.)

Due to the non-commutativity of distinct components of orbital (or spin) angular momentum you cannot say anything about the other two components once you measure one.

I think what you're getting at is the fact that if you treat the total orbital angular momentum as if it were coming from an orbiting point mass then the component measured in the direct of the magnetic field (or any other one direction) will always be insufficient to account for the total (root sum of square of components). One then reasons that there is some component in the other two cardinal directions contributing to this total. That's OK except that it is improper to speak assuredly about that which fundamentally cannot be observed...most especially in quantum theory.

It's not just that classical point objects have quantized states. They don't have states as such at all but only potential observables not all of which can be made empirically meaningful at the same time.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K