Wave function when there is coupling between spin and position

Happiness
Messages
686
Reaction score
30
Screenshot 2019-08-09 at 12.07.34 PM.png

Screenshot 2019-08-09 at 12.07.55 PM.png


Why can't the general state, in the presence of coupling, take the form $$\psi_-(r)\chi_++\psi_+(r)\chi_-$$ where ##\psi_+(r)## and ##\psi_-(r)## are respectively the symmetric and anti-symmetric part of the wave function, and ##\chi_+## and ##\chi_-## are respectively the spinors representing spin up and spin down? In other words, why must the "coefficient" of the spin-up spinor be symmetric, in the presence of coupling?

Reference: Intro to QM, David J Griffiths, p210
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You just changed the orientation of the z axis (by swapping what up and down is). Why would it be symmetric and antisymmetric? I don't know, needs more context, I don't have Griffiths around.
 
The part of the spatial wave function associated/coupled with ##\chi_+## does not need to be symmetric, right?

On second thought, I think ##\psi_+## does not represent a symmetric wave function, but it’s just to denote the part of the spatial wave function associated with ##\chi_+##. Throughout the book, Griffiths has been using ##\psi_+## to mean a symmetric wave function, but I think it does not mean that in this particular case, hence the confusion.
 
Last edited:
That makes more sense.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K