Spin-Orbit Coupling & Isotope Shift

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kelly0303
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Isotope Shift Spin
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the relationship between isotope shifts and spin-orbit coupling in atomic transitions, specifically from S to P states. The parameterization of isotope shift is given by the equation $$\delta\nu = K\frac{m_1m_2}{m_1-m_2}+F\delta$$, where K and F are parameters related to electronic transitions. The impact of spin-orbit coupling, represented as $$A S\cdot L$$, leads to the splitting of the P state into $$P_{1/2}$$ and $$P_{3/2}$$, resulting in distinct isotope shifts $$\delta\nu_{S-P_{1/2}}$$ and $$\delta\nu_{S-P_{3/2}}$$. The discussion suggests a method for calculating K for the D1 and D2 lines by evaluating expectation values involving nuclear and electron spins.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of atomic transitions, specifically S and P states.
  • Familiarity with spin-orbit coupling and its mathematical representation.
  • Knowledge of isotope shifts and their parameterization in atomic physics.
  • Basic proficiency in quantum mechanics, particularly in evaluating expectation values.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the derivation of the isotope shift formula in atomic physics.
  • Study the Clebsch-Gordon coefficients and their application in angular momentum coupling.
  • Explore the implications of magnetic quadrupole interactions in atomic transitions.
  • Learn about the dipole approximation and its limitations in quantum mechanics.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in atomic and nuclear physics, as well as researchers focused on quantum mechanics and atomic transitions.

kelly0303
Messages
573
Reaction score
33
Hello! The isotope shift for an atomic transition is usually parameterized as:

$$\delta\nu = K\frac{m_1m_2}{m_1-m_2}+F\delta<r^2>$$

where ##m_{1,2}## are the masses of the 2 isotopes, ##\delta<r^2>## is the change in the mean square charge radius between the 2 isotopes and K and F are some parameters having to do with the electronic transition that is considered. I am a bit confused about how the spin-orbit coupling comes into play. For example, assume that we ignore the spin orbit coupling for now, and we have a transition from an S to a P state. The parameters of this transition are ##\delta\nu_{S-P}## (which we measure) and ##F_{S-P}## and ##K_{S-P}## (which are usually calculated numerically). If we account for the spin orbit coupling (assume it is of the form ##A S\cdot L##), the P state will get split, say, into ##P_{1/2}## and ##P_{3/2}##. Now we have 2 isotope shifts: ##\delta\nu_{S-P_{1/2}}## and ##\delta\nu_{S-P_{3/2}}## and a value of K and F for each of the 2. Is there any relationship between the ##\delta\nu_{S-P}## and ##\delta\nu_{S-P_{1/2}}## and ##\delta\nu_{S-P_{3/2}}##? Or between ##K_{S-P}## and ##K_{S-P_{1/2}}## and ##K_{S-P_{3/2}}## and same for F? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm really not too sure because I'm not totally confident I know where the constants K and F come from. But my hunch says that these two terms correspond very roughly to the two terms in equation 6.87 of Griffiths. I think F is proportional to the coefficient that for hydrogen is ##\frac{\mu_0 g_p e^2}{3m_p m_e} \langle\mathbf{S}_p \cdot \mathbf{S}_e\rangle## where ##\mathbf{S}_p## is the nuclear spin and ##\mathbf{S}_e## is the electron spin. It's definitely not the same, because the term in Griffiths neglects the nuclear charge radius ##\langle r^2 \rangle## and uses the form for a contact interaction, which assumes ##\langle r^2 \rangle \rightarrow 0##.

If my hunch is correct, then you can see how you would calculate K for the D1 and D2 lines by evaluating the expectation value $$K \propto \langle \frac{3(\mathbf{S}_p \cdot \hat{r})(\mathbf{S}_e \cdot \hat{r}) - \mathbf{S}_p \cdot \mathbf{S}_e}{r^3} \rangle$$ where little r now means the electron radius.

For example, to get K in the ##P_{3/2}## state, you'd need to expand ##|J=\frac{3}{2},m_J \rangle## into spherical harmonics using the Clebsch-Gordon coefficients. Then you could perform the angular integral (the expectation value I put on its own line above), for the ##P_{3/2}## state. You could repeat the process for the ##P_{1/2}## state, and take the difference. That would be related to the difference in K between D1 and D2 lines. Does that help?

I also couldn't tell you how good is the dipole approximation that Griffiths makes (first term in eqn 6.86). It's possible some theory folks who were cited in your previous threads have considered magnetic quadrupole and higher order interactions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Greg Bernhardt

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
3K