Spin orbit coupling and hydrogen problem

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the application of perturbation theory to the hydrogen atom, specifically regarding the eigenstates of total angular momentum J = L + S. The key quantum numbers identified are n, l, j, and mj, with l being a good quantum number due to its association with the total angular momentum, while s is not considered a good quantum number because it is always 1/2. The conversation highlights that L and S are not conserved separately, yet j and mj are conserved in isotropic systems. The distinction between good and approximate good quantum numbers is clarified, emphasizing the role of weak perturbations in lifting degeneracies.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics and perturbation theory
  • Familiarity with angular momentum operators in quantum systems
  • Knowledge of eigenstates and eigenvalues in quantum mechanics
  • Basic concepts of isotropic systems and conservation laws
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of perturbation theory in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the role of angular momentum in quantum systems
  • Learn about the significance of good quantum numbers in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the effects of weak perturbations on degenerate states
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in quantum mechanics, particularly those studying atomic physics and perturbation theory, will benefit from this discussion.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
I don't know if you are familiar with it, but in pertubationt theory for hydrogen it is handy to look for eigenstates of J = L + S since this commutes with the hamiltonian (L and S are not separately conserved).
My book then says that the good quantum numbers are: n,l, j, mj
I must admit I'm not used to this idea of good quantum numbers - my book hasn't introduced the term properly (I'm guessing it is just the quantum numbers belongning to the set of eigenvectors that diagonalizes the pertubation) and the thing that bothers me the most is: Why is l a good quantum number but not s? Surely these should be treated on eqaul footing since they are just the length of the total orbital and spin angular momentum respectively. And why would l be a good quantum number when L is not conserved separately.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, j and mj are certainly good quantum numbers as they refer to the total angular momentum which is conserved in an isotropic system.
l and s are only approximately good in so far as the perturbation is weak and will lift in lowest order the splitting of the degenerate states with different j but same s and l.
s is probably not mentioned as it is always 1/2 and this doesn't have to be written down all the time.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K