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

AI Thread 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
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top