What does space quantization of angular momentum actually signify?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of space quantization of angular momentum in quantum mechanics, particularly focusing on the implications of direction quantization. Participants explore the meaning of quantized angular momentum directions and the significance of minimum angles between angular momentum and arbitrary axes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how orbital angular momentum can always maintain a minimum angle with any chosen axis, particularly if that axis aligns with the angular momentum itself.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on whether direction quantization implies discrete angles between different angular momenta or only between angular momenta and arbitrary axes, expressing uncertainty about the interpretation of this quantization.
  • A later reply suggests that in orthodox quantum mechanics, the question may be considered meaningless, while in alternative interpretations like de Broglie-Bohm, angular momentum is treated as having well-defined values along trajectories.
  • One participant emphasizes that quantization does not exclude the existence of intermediary values, noting that superpositions of wave functions can yield average values between discrete outcomes.
  • Another participant expresses confusion about the implications of direction quantization, particularly the assertion that angular momentum cannot align with any arbitrary axis, which they find counterintuitive.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of direction quantization, with no consensus reached on its implications or the nature of angular momentum in quantum mechanics. The discussion includes competing views from orthodox and alternative interpretations of quantum theory.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding the implications of direction quantization and the role of wave functions in determining angular momentum values. The discussion reflects ongoing uncertainties and assumptions regarding quantum mechanics interpretations.

I_am_learning
Messages
681
Reaction score
16
I have just come to learn (Physics, with modern physics, Richard Wolfson, J M. Pasachoff, second edition) that not only angular momentum's magnitude is quantized, but also its direction.
Its given that, Cos[tex]\theta[/tex]min= l / [tex]\sqrt{l(l+1)}[/tex]
Telling that, [tex]\theta[/tex]min is the minimum angle between any orbital angular momentum (l) and any arbitrary chosen axis.

How can the orbital angular momentum always make certain minimum angle [tex]\theta[/tex]min with any arbitrarily chosen axis?
What if my chosen axis happens (by chance) to be the same axis of the orbital angular momentum?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It seems that my question was wrong. (no reply for so long)
What I am basically asking is --> What do direction quantization (of angular momentum) signify? Does it signifiy that
1. there should be only discrete angles between different angular momenta
OR
2. As I said in OP, there should be only discrete angles (greater than [tex]\theta[/tex]min) between any angular momenta and any chosen arbitrary axis
 
Last edited:
thecritic said:
It seems that my question was wrong. (no reply for so long)
What I am basically asking is --> What do direction quantization (of angular momentum) signify? Does it signifiy that
1. there should be only discrete angles between different angular momenta
OR
2. As I said in OP, there should be only discrete angles (greater than [tex]\theta[/tex]min) between any angular momenta and any chosen arbitrary axis
Hi there,

One of the reasons you're not getting an answer is that in the orthodox interpretation of QM, the answer is 'the question is meaningless since we can never know the reality of a quantum system'.

In other interpretations such as many-worlds people only ever concern themselves with eternal verities and speaking in logically consistent sentences rather than concerning themselves with ontology or 'what really might be going on'. So they're not going to answer you either.

So conventionally one may speak of 'angular momentum' but you have to do 'air quotes' with your fingers as if to say 'but not really'.

In the de Broglie-Bohm interpretation however, the answer is as usual, straightforward. Particles have trajectories, pushed around by an objectively existing wave field represented mathematically by the wave function. And orbital angular momentum really is the angular momentum of particles 'orbiting' the nucleus. Of course this is a bit difficult if you believe that particles only exist when you look at them (as in the orthodox view).

Why is it quantized? You have to remember that in de Broglie-Bohm theory quantities are well-defined and continuously variable for all quantum states - values for the subset of wave functions which are eigenstates of some operator have no fundamental physical significance. So this characteristic features of QM - the existence of discrete energy levels - is due to the restriction of a basically continuous theory to motion associated with a subclass of eigenfunctions.

Now what happens with angular momentum? Let's say we prepare the system with a wave function which is an eigenfunction of the [tex]{\hat L}_z[/tex] operator (where the direction of the z-axis is arbitrary). Then the z component of the angular momentum will coincide with the eigenvalue of [tex]{\hat L}_z[/tex], and the total orbital angular momentum with the eigenvalue of [tex]{\hat L}^2[/tex]. Conventionally one would say that the x- and y- components are 'undefined'. However, in de Broglie-Bohm they are perfectly well-defined. In fact you have:

[tex]L_x= -m \hbar \cot \theta \cos \theta[/tex]

[tex]L_y = m\hbar \cot \theta \sin \theta[/tex]

[tex]L_z = m\hbar[/tex]

So the difference is that along the trajectory [tex]L_z[/tex] and the total angular momentum are conserved, but [tex]L_x[/tex] and [tex]L_y[/tex] are not. Thus, although the classical force is central the motion is asymmetrical, which reflects the fact that a particular direction in space has been singled out as the quantization axis.

Hope this helps, though I suspect it won't for some reason.
 
Quantization does not mean that there may not be intermediary values.

Take a superposition of different wave functions and you will obtain an average value between the discrete values. Normally the wave functions are superpositions rather than the eigenstates.
 
Last edited:
zenith8 said:
Hi there,
Hope this helps, though I suspect it won't for some reason.
First of all, thank you for answering.
To make matter clear: I am not confused to accept that Energy and angular momentum is conserved. I can readily accept it by saying that, its what mathematically follows, if you solve Schrödinger's equation for electron bound to a nucleus and apply boundary conditions for the wave function.
What I am confused about is, direction quantization of Angular Momentum; from which follows a absurd sounding statement that --> whichever arbitrary axis you chose in space, the angular momentum isn't aligned to that axis!(it always makes some minimum angle with my arbitary axis)?

I hope you understand what I meant.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K