Total spin of triplet and singlet states

K448
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm a litte confused about spin triplet and singlet states. How do we know that for ↑↓+↓↑ the total spin S is 1, and for ↑↓-↓↑ the total spin S is 0?
Also, how is total ms computed for these two states? (I understand that they are both 0, but not sure where that comes from)

Thank you very much for the help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
K448 said:
How do we know that for ↑↓+↓↑ the total spin S is 1, and for ↑↓-↓↑ the total spin S is 0?
Apply the (squared) total spin operator ##\mathbf{S}^2 = (\mathbf{S_1}+\mathbf{S_2})^2## to those states.
K448 said:
Also, how is total ms computed for these two states
Apply the operator ##S_z = S_{1z} + S_{2z}## to those states. Alternatively, upon following the theorem of the addition of angular momenta, you will find that the z component of the resultant spin state is equal to the sum of the z components of the individual states appearing in the resultant state's representation in the individual spin state basis.
 
blue_leaf77 said:
Apply the (squared) total spin operator ##\mathbf{S}^2 = (\mathbf{S_1}+\mathbf{S_2})^2## to those states.

Apply the operator ##S_z = S_{1z} + S_{2z}## to those states. Alternatively, upon following the theorem of the addition of angular momenta, you will find that the z component of the resultant spin state is equal to the sum of the z components of the individual states appearing in the resultant state's representation in the individual spin state basis.
Thank you very much! I realize I never learned the total spin operator... Is there a recommended reading about this?
 
blue_leaf77 said:
Introduction to QM by Griffith chapter 4 or Modern QM by Sakurai chapter 3. The latter is more advanced than the former but especially on the addition of angular momenta and it's in fact my favorite QM book, I found it still easy to understand. Alternatively MIT's opencourse material will also do http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/...all-2013/lecture-notes/MIT8_05F13_Chap_10.pdf
Thank you! :)
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top