![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
A spinning zero diameter electron has zero angular momentum, because no part of the electron’s mass extends beyond a radius of zero. The angular momentum L of a particle about a given origin is defined as:
where r is the position vector of the particle relative to the origin, p is the linear momentum of the particle, and × denotes the cross product.
Including electron ‘spin quantum number’ within the Spin (physics) article, w/o identifying the conflict between the zero diameter and non-zero angular momentum gives the impression that a spinning electron with zero diameter indeed has momentum, and the impression that (zero diameter) electron spin is the cause of magnetic moment.
“… an angular momentum and a magnetic moment could indeed arise from a spinning sphere of charge, but this classical picture cannot fit the size or quantized nature of the electron spin. The property called electron spin must be considered to be a quantum concept without detailed classical analogy. ” http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/spin.html
“The term "electron spin" is not to be taken literally in the classical sense as a description of the origin of the magnetic moment described above. To be sure, a spinning sphere of charge can produce a magnetic moment, but the magnitude of the magnetic moment obtained above cannot be reasonably modeled by considering the electron as a spinning sphere. High energy scattering from electrons shows no "size" of the electron down to a resolution of about 10-3fermis, and at that size a preposterously high spin rate of some 1032 radian/s would be required to match the observed angular momentum.” http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/spin.html Vze2wgsm1 ( talk) 23:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
The start of the article says is the spin quantum number. Later at some point it calls the spin quantum number. They are different things. Is there a standard definition of "spin quantum number", or do experts freely call both of these things the "spin quantum number"? If there's a standard definition, let's only call one of and the spin quantum number, not both. If there's not a standard definition, we should warn the reader. John Baez ( talk) 19:49, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
@ Lingonberry 666 you added the Template:Technical but you did not open a corresponding Talk to explain why. What are your suggestions? Johnjbarton ( talk) 16:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
The majority of the material in this article is about the physical phenomenon, not about the quantum number. Johnjbarton ( talk) 21:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)