Undergrad What is the quantum spin of a single electron in an (atomic) orbital?

Click For Summary
The quantum spin of a valence electron in a silver atom during the Stern-Gerlach experiment is debated, with suggestions that it may be random or in a superposition until measured. The second electron in an orbital must have opposite spin to the first to occupy the same orbital, a requirement for maintaining the Pauli exclusion principle. The discussion touches on the appropriateness of the orbital model, highlighting that different theoretical approaches like Hartree-Fock and density functional theory yield varying interpretations of orbitals. Additionally, the lack of a magnetic field in the furnace suggests that the spin of the valence electron could be random. Overall, the complexities of quantum spin and orbital theory remain a challenging topic in quantum mechanics.
Curious Cat
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
I wrote a little (computer) program to fill in the atomic electron
configuration one electron at a time, for children, and it got me
thinking, about this.
What is the quantum spin of the valence electron in the silver atom in
the furnace in the Stern-Gerlach experiment?
. Up, down, at random, alternating, in a (quantum) superposition (of
both), or none? Does it even have/get one until it's measured/observed
/needed?
. Does the second electron, in an orbital, have to have the opposite
spin to start, with, or is it made to conform?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the furnace, the quantum spin of the valence electron of the silver atom should be random, no? There is no magnetic field inside the furnace relative to which there would be any reason that it should be up, or down.
(This can be described by using a density matrix instead of a wave function. One reason for using that description is that it makes it clear that there is no difference whether you assume that one half is up and the other half down, or that one half is left and the other half right, or that a quarter is respectively up, down, left, and right, or that the state is basically just totally random. ... But that goes into territory where only very patient children would be able to follow.)

The second electron in an orbital has the opposite spin of the first electron in the same orbital, otherwise it would be wrong to claim that both electrons are in the same orbital. Whether the orbital picture itself is fully appropriate is a separate question.
(Advanced level explanation: the orbitals which arise from the Hartree-Fock approximation cannot be fully appropriate. However, orbitals also arise from density functional theory computations, and there it is less clear whether they are appropriate or not, even so their exact interpretation remains unclear.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K