Angular momentum and its uncertainty

In summary, the electron in a L=0 state doesn't really have an defined position, but it doesn't seem to fall into the nucleus because it has no central force.
  • #1
fluidistic
Gold Member
3,948
263
[itex][L_x,L_y]=i \hbar L_z \neq 0[/itex]. In fact it seems we can know only the modulus squared of the angular momentum and one component, at a same time.
However if I take an electron say in the fundamental state in the hydrogen atom, L=0. Since the modulus squared is equal to 0, it means that all components are worth 0 or I'm missing something? Wouldn't that mean that we can know "the 3 components of the angular momentum without any uncertainty when it's worth 0"? Where does the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle applies here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The uncertainty relation in general states that [itex]\Delta A\Delta B\geq\frac{1}{2}\left|\left\langle \left[\hat{A},\hat{B}\right]\right\rangle\right|[/itex]. For angular momentum, this takes the form [itex]\Delta L_{x}\Delta L_{y}\geq\frac{\hbar}{2}\left|\left\langle L_{z}\right\rangle\right|[/itex]. Thus, if the expectation value of angular momentum in the z-direction is zero, the uncertainties in angular momentum in the x and y directions can be zero. By similar reasoning reasoning, you can see that if expectation values of angular momentum are zero in all three directions, then uncertainty in angular momentum can also be zero in all three directions, and thus the system can be in a state of definite angular momentum in all three directions as long as the angular momentum is zero.
 
  • #3
Ok thank you very much for the information. :)
 
  • #4
The more counterintuitive thing about the L=0 states is that even though the electron has no angular momenum, it doesn't fall into the nucleus. Do you know why?
 
  • #5
lugita15 said:
The more counterintuitive thing about the L=0 states is that even though the electron has no angular momenum, it doesn't fall into the nucleus. Do you know why?

No, I don't really know why. But I've learned that in QM a central force does not imply a motion in a plane unlike in classical mechanics. It implies a motion in 3 dimensions, so it does not seem strange to me that a vanishing angular momentum doesn't imply the electron to "fall into the nucleous".
Adding the fact that the electron hasn't a well defined position, stopping to think things classically would help.
To answer your question mathematically, I think that the Schrödinger's equation has a stationary solution with L=0. But physically I don't know the answer. I would love to read it though :)
 

FAQ: Angular momentum and its uncertainty

1. What is angular momentum?

Angular momentum is a measure of an object's rotational motion, taking into account its mass, speed, and distance from the axis of rotation. In simpler terms, it is the amount of rotational energy an object possesses.

2. How is angular momentum calculated?

Angular momentum is calculated by multiplying an object's moment of inertia (a measure of its resistance to rotational motion) by its angular velocity (the rate at which it rotates).

3. What is the uncertainty principle in relation to angular momentum?

The uncertainty principle states that it is impossible to know the exact values of both an object's angular momentum and its position at the same time. This means that the more accurately we measure one of these values, the less accurately we can know the other.

4. How does angular momentum affect an object's stability?

An object with a high angular momentum is more stable, as it has a greater resistance to changes in its rotation. This is why spinning objects, such as tops or gyroscopes, can maintain their rotation without falling over.

5. Can angular momentum be changed?

Yes, angular momentum can be changed by applying an external torque (a force that causes rotation) to an object. This can either increase or decrease the object's angular momentum, depending on the direction of the torque relative to the object's rotation.

Back
Top