Lz: A Convenient but Arbitrary Choice in Quantum Mechanics

  • Thread starter Thread starter mattlorig
  • Start date Start date
mattlorig
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
In the hydrogen atom, I believe most people are familiar with the following three equations:
L^2 (psi) = l*(l+1)*hbar^2*(psi)
Lz (psi) = ml*hbar*(psi)
H (psi) = -1/n^2*junk*(psi)
where L^2, Lz, and H are the linear operators for total angular momentum squared, angular momentum about the z-axis, and energy. I'm comfortable with eigenvalues, eigenvectors, etc. The thing I don't understand, however, is what Lz really is. Since our choice of axes is completely arbitrary, I could have just as easily chosen Lx to be Lz. But of course, if I know Lz, I can not possibly know anything about Lx (other than, perhaps, its maximum value).

I gues what I'm asking is the following: is Lz just a way to say, that if we were to measure the angular momentum of an electron about a certain axis (which we'll call z) it can only have values of ml*hbar, and once we know what Lz is, we can't possibly know anything about Lx and Ly?

I'd really appreciate it if somebody could straighten this out for me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, our choice of axes is of course completely arbitrary.

L_x,L_y and L_z do not commute, but they DO commute with L^2. So we can find a complete basis of eigenvectors common to L^2 and an axis. So we have to make a choice, L_z is used for convenience.

If you measured L_z, then the electron will be in an eigenstate of L_z. Now try to see what the probabilities are of getting m_l\hbar when measuring L_x.
(Use L_x=\frac{1}{2}(L_++L_-))
 
Galileo said:
Yes, our choice of axes is of course completely arbitrary.
L_x,L_y and L_z do not commute, but they DO commute with L^2. So we can find a complete basis of eigenvectors common to L^2 and an axis. So we have to make a choice, L_z is used for convenience.
If you measured L_z, then the electron will be in an eigenstate of L_z. Now try to see what the probabilities are of getting m_l\hbar when measuring L_x.
(Use L_x=\frac{1}{2}(L_++L_-))


Sorry,Galileo,but i just couldn't help myself. :-p
So,this convention is one of the many more encountered in physics.Think about the old famous conventions regarding the magnetic field (induction) \vec{B}.Both in electrodynamics (charged particle in magnetic/electromagnetic field) and in QM (Zeeman effect (normal/anomal)) it's always chosen along "Oz(=Ox_{3})" axis.I don't know why,i never met the guys who did that. :wink: You'll have to accept it,the same way you accepted those wicked conventions in geometrical optics,that convention for the sign of work in thermodynamics and many more.

A physicist's mind is twisted in uncountable ways... :cool:

Daniel.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Back
Top