1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.PHYSICS.PARTICLE

  • Does a bound electron have a magnetic dipole?

    From chemguy@21:1/5 to All on Wed Feb 27 16:59:08 2019
    The four quantum numbers (n, L, mL, ms) are well defined in the literature. Where; ms is magnetic moment associated with spin; ms = ±½ (spin up, spin down)

    It is reasonable to assume that the rotation of a bound electron may set up a magnetic dipole. If a magnetic dipole does exist then the magnetic moment “associated with orbit” (mn) may have two possible values;
    mn = ±½

    Where;
    mn = -½ represents “dipole north”
    mn = +½ represents “dipole south”

    Does a bound electron have orbital magnetic moment?

    Reference; http://newstuff77.weebly.com page 01 The Pyramid Periodic Table

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn@21:1/5 to Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on Mon Mar 4 22:52:53 2019
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
    chemguy wrote:
    The four quantum numbers (n, L, mL, ms) are well defined in the literature. >> Where; ms is magnetic moment associated with spin; ms = (spin up, spin down)

    One usually writes m_L and m_s, otherwise that is correct.

    Correction: m_s parametrizes intrinsic angular momentum. The magnetic
    momentum is caused by the spin and orbital angular momentum states instead.

    --
    PointedEars

    Twitter: @PointedEars2
    Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn@21:1/5 to chemguy on Mon Mar 4 22:43:34 2019
    chemguy wrote:
    The four quantum numbers (n, L, mL, ms) are well defined in the literature. Where; ms is magnetic moment associated with spin; ms = ±½ (spin up, spin down)

    One usually writes m_L and m_s, otherwise that is correct.

    It is reasonable to assume that the rotation of a bound electron may set up a magnetic dipole.

    Not necessarily. However, it is not reasonable to assume that there is not
    a magnetic dipole in the first place, because a proper interpretation of the well-confirmed Maxwell equation ∇⃗ · B⃗ = 0 (the divergence of the magnetic
    field is zero) is „magnetic field lines are closed“ which means that there are no magnetic monopoles (by contrast to the electric field).

    --
    PointedEars

    Twitter: @PointedEars2
    Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From margaretporat@gmail.com@21:1/5 to chemguy on Sat Jun 22 23:47:58 2019
    On Thursday, February 28, 2019 at 2:59:11 AM UTC+2, chemguy wrote:
    The four quantum numbers (n, L, mL, ms) are well defined in the literature. Where; ms is magnetic moment associated with spin; ms = ±½ (spin up, spin down)

    It is reasonable to assume that the rotation of a bound electron may set up a magnetic dipole. If a magnetic dipole does exist then the magnetic moment “associated with orbit” (mn) may have two possible values;
    mn = ±½

    Where;
    mn = -½ represents “dipole north”
    mn = +½ represents “dipole south”

    Does a bound electron have orbital magnetic moment?

    Reference; http://newstuff77.weebly.com page 01 The Pyramid Periodic Table
    =======================
    it seems reasonable == so having a dipole
    ====
    TAB
    Y.P
    ====================

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)