MHB Spherical Harmonics: Showing $\delta_{m,0}\sqrt{\frac{2\ell + 1}{4\pi}}$

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on demonstrating the identity \(Y_{\ell}^m(0,\varphi) = \delta_{m,0}\sqrt{\frac{2\ell + 1}{4\pi}}\). The key point is that when \(m = 0\), the expression yields \(\sqrt{\frac{2\ell + 1}{4\pi}}\), while for other values of \(m\), the result should be zero. The confusion arises from the misunderstanding of the associated Legendre polynomial's behavior at \(\theta = 0\), where it is zero for non-zero \(m\). Ultimately, it is confirmed that the expression holds true, as non-zero \(m\) leads to zero due to the properties of the associated Legendre polynomial. The discussion concludes with the clarification that \(P_l^m(1) = 1\) is only valid for \(m = 0\).
Dustinsfl
Messages
2,217
Reaction score
5
I am trying to show that
\[
Y_{\ell}^m(0,\varphi) = \delta_{m,0}\sqrt{\frac{2\ell + 1}{4\pi}}.
\]
When \(m = 0\), I obtain \(\sqrt{\frac{2\ell + 1}{4\pi}}\).

However, I am not getting 0 for other \(m\). Plus, to show this is true, I can't methodically go through each \(m\).

How can I do this?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
dwsmith said:
I am trying to show that
\[
Y_{\ell}^m(0,\varphi) = \delta_{m,0}\sqrt{\frac{2\ell + 1}{4\pi}}.
\]
When \(m = 0\), I obtain \(\sqrt{\frac{2\ell + 1}{4\pi}}\).

However, I am not getting 0 for other \(m\). Plus, to show this is true, I can't methodically go through each \(m\).

How can I do this?
The [math]\delta _{m, 0} [/math] forces the expression to be 0 unless m = 0. There is no other m to compute with. I'm not sure what you are trying to get at with the "other" m values?

-Dan
 
topsquark said:
The [math]\delta _{m, 0} [/math] forces the expression to be 0 unless m = 0. There is no other m to compute with. I'm not sure what you are trying to get at with the "other" m values?

-Dan

I understand the kronecker delta. I am trying to show the identity is true.
 
dwsmith said:
I understand the kronecker delta. I am trying to show the identity is true.
Oh! I see the problem now. Yes, the expression is not correct.
[math]Y_l^m( \theta, \phi ) = (-1)^m \sqrt{ \frac{2l + 1}{4 \pi} \frac{(l - m)!}{(l + m)!}} P_l^m( cos ( \theta ) ) e^{i m \phi }[/math]

Gah! I can't get the LaTeX to code the second line. Anyway, the only term that drops out for theta = 0 is the associated Legendre polynomial. Not much of a simplification. Are you perhaps adding some together?

-Dan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
topsquark said:
Oh! I see the problem now. Yes, the expression is not correct.
[math]Y_l^m( \theta, \phi ) = (-1)^m \sqrt{ \frac{2l + 1}{4 \pi} \frac{(l - m)!}{(l + m)!}} P_l^m( cos ( \theta ) ) e^{i m \phi }[/math]

Gah! I can't get the LaTeX to code the second line. Anyway, the only term that drops out for theta = 0 is the associated Legendre polynomial. Not much of a simplification. Are you perhaps adding some together?

-Dan

No but I am pretty sure it is correct. I have Mathematica so I have entered in SphericalY[l,m,0,\phi] and tried different l's and m's, but every time m is nonzero, I do get zero back.
 
dwsmith said:
No but I am pretty sure it is correct. I have Mathematica so I have entered in SphericalY[l,m,0,\phi] and tried different l's and m's, but every time m is nonzero, I do get zero back.
Okay, yes you are correct. I had been thinking that [math]P_l^m(1) = 1[/math] but that's only true for m = 0. When theta = 0 [math]P_l^m(1) = 0[/math] for non-zero m as all the non-zero m are proportional to sin(theta).

-Dan
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K