Why we know spin vector is an axial vector?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ndung200790
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axial Spin Vector
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the spin vector in quantum mechanics, specifically why it is considered an axial vector, in comparison to orbital angular momentum. Participants explore the mathematical and conceptual similarities between spin and orbital angular momentum, as well as the implications of these properties in different physical contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that spin is introduced as another form of angular momentum, similar to orbital angular momentum, which leads to the conclusion that both share properties such as being axial vectors.
  • One participant suggests that the spin can be visualized as a fast circular motion around an average position, but acknowledges issues with this interpretation, such as the expectation of radiation that does not align with experimental observations.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of axial vectors in the context of angular momentum, arguing that if spin were not an axial vector, it would complicate the interchangeability of spin and orbital angular momentum.
  • A later reply challenges the previous argument by referencing the weak interaction, which involves a subtraction of axial and vector currents, indicating that the relationship between these types of vectors may not be straightforward in all contexts.
  • One participant discusses the complexities of defining orbital angular momentum and spin within relativistic quantum mechanics, noting that total angular momentum must be an axial vector, but the separation of components is not uniquely defined.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of spin and its classification as an axial vector, with some supporting the idea while others raise challenges based on specific interactions and relativistic considerations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these arguments.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific interactions (e.g., parity-conserving vs. weak interactions) and the unresolved nature of angular momentum definitions in relativistic quantum mechanics.

ndung200790
Messages
519
Reaction score
0
Please teach me this:
We know that orbit angular momentum is the product of coordinate operator vector and momentum operator,so when we reflect the coordinate system the angular momentum is unchanging(axial vector).But I do not understand why spin vector is axial vector.
Thank you very much in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Good question. I think that spin was introduced just as another moment of momentum, in addition to the orbital moment of momentum. So all the mathematics is very similar, including the axialness.
One way to think of spin moment of momentum is that the particle performs fast circular motion around some average position, and then spin is again product of position vector and momentum. This picture has however the problems that the particle should then radiate electromagnetic waves, which was not recognized in experiments.
 
hi ndung200790! :smile:
ndung200790 said:
… But I do not understand why spin vector is axial vector.

we can't add axial vectors and non-axial vectors (if forget the correct name :redface:)

if spin wasn't axial, we wouldn't be able to interchange spin angular momentum and orbital angular momentum :wink:
 
Unfortunately this argument is not true since the weak-interaction current is precisely of (V-A) form, i.e., you subtract the axial-vector from the vector current. Of course, your argument is true, when considering only parity-conserving interactions (strong, electromagnetic).

Further, in relativistic quantum mechanics there is no unique frame-independent splitting of orbital angular momentum and spin. Thus it is not easy to answer the question within relativistic theory, but of course total angular momentum must be an axial vector.
 
ndung200790 said:
PWe know that orbit angular momentum is the product of coordinate operator vector and momentum operator,so when we reflect the coordinate system the angular momentum is unchanging(axial vector). But I do not understand why spin vector is axial vector.
Let's write the (classical) orbital angular momentum tensor (components) as
$$
J_{ij} ~=~ x_i p_j - x_j p_i ~.
$$
As you said, this does not change under a coordinate reflection.

But this is often written in the form ##L = x \times p## or, with explicit indices, as
$$
L_i ~=~ \varepsilon_{ijk} x^j p^k
$$
where ##\varepsilon_{ijk}## is the Levi-Civita antisymmetric symbol, and the Einstein summation convention is used.

Now, ##\varepsilon_{ijk}## are components of a pseudo-tensor, since it also changes sign under a reflection. Therefore the ##L_i## form a pseudo-vector (which is another name for "axial vector".)

Here's some Wiki links for more information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi-Civita_tensor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_vector
 
Hi Vanhees71!
Do you mean that in relativistic QM the sum of orbit angular momentum and spin is conservable,then spin must be axial vector?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K