Trying to find references for polarization effect of Normal Zeeman Effect

Ashuron
Messages
141
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am trying to find a resource that can explain how σ and ∏ lines obtain their polarizations.
I have not found resource that actually show the calculation or solid explanation that show this.The references are usually state that σ and ∏ have circular polarization and linear polarization respectively. But they did not explain why, assume that it is a given fact.

Some resources in the internet seems to explain this by conservation of angular momentum J. Since in Normal Zeeman Effect S=0 for both states involved in the transition, L is conserved. So, the resources reasoned that for Δml=1,-1 , a photon with spin 1 or -1 will be produced. They correspond to left and right circularly polarized light. For Δml=o, they state that there will be equal amount of photon with spin 1 and -1. This corresponds to a linearly polarized light. It seems a lot of hand waving argument.

I have checked some textbooks like Fowles' Modern Optics. It has 2 pages explanation with pictures. It interpret the transition as an oscillating dipole. The example discussed 1s and 2p transitions of Hydrogen atoms. The book do not give any calculation. I also prefer to have an explanation how to apply the explanation for different orbitals, not only 1s and 2p transitions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi, I had a similar problem finding references for this previously. I don't think I ever found an explanation for it other than the hand wavey stuff. I'll have a look back at my report and let you know if I find anything.
 
Actually the QM textbook by cohen tannoudji has some mathematical explanation.
But it's a bit beyond me.
 
I think this was the most useful thing I found, but I still don't really get it. It doesn't actually explain why the polarisation happens either.
www.unc.edu/~mgood/research/Zeeman_Effect.doc

It looks like all my other web links have expired or moved, other than this one. I think I gave up at this point!
http://www.tcd.ie/Physics/people/Peter.Gallagher/lectures/js_atomic/JS_atomic_lecture12.ppt
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thx a lot.
 
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