Spin and helicityTraditionally, in textbooks on quantum mechanics, spin is introduced via an idealized Stern-Gerlach experiment in which a non-relativistic beam of silver atoms passes through an inhomogeneous magnetic field.Each atom is treated as a single valence electron of charge -e in an s-state.The subsequent splitting of the beam into two indicates the two-valuedness of Sz, which is related to the value 1/2 for s, and the magnitude of the splitting shows that the magnetic moment /l is related to s by e /l = -~s, me the proportionality factor (the gyromagnetic ratio) being twice as big as the factor that classically gives the magnetic moment due to the orbital angular momentum of a point charge.Historically, however, it seems that the early Stern-Gerlach experiments, begun in 1922, had no influence at all upon the discovery of spin, simply because they were too imprecise.Rather, the concept of spin appeared after a long and tedious battle to understand the splitting patterns and separations in line spectra.Several people had for various reasons discussed classical models of rotating charge distributions but Kronig, in 1924, was the first to show that an electron with spin 1/2 would explain the pattern of what we would today call L • S splitting, as well as anomalies in the Zeeman effect.He realized, though, that the gyromagnetic ratio ( -ejmc) needed for the latter would give L • S splittings twice as big as those observed.It is said that Pauli expressed his negative reaction to Kronig's idea with such vehemence that Kronig never published his work (Mehra and Rechenberg, 1982).Soon thereafter, in 1925, the same idea occurred to Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit (1925), who proceeded to a detailed analysis of the splittings, concluding at first that everything worked beautifully, but then becoming aware, as a consequence of a comment by Heisenberg, of the factor-of-2 inconsistency mentioned above.
Spin and helicityTraditionally, in textbooks on quantum mechanics, spin is introduced via an idealized Stern-Gerlach experiment in which a non-relativistic beam of silver atoms passes through an inhomogeneous magnetic field.Each atom is treated as a single valence electron of charge -e in an s-state.The subsequent splitting of the beam into two indicates the two-valuedness of Sz, which is related to the value 1/2 for s, and the magnitude of the splitting shows that the magnetic moment /l is related to s by e /l = -~s, me the proportionality factor (the gyromagnetic ratio) being twice as big as the factor that classically gives the magnetic moment due to the orbital angular momentum of a point charge.Historically, however, it seems that the early Stern-Gerlach experiments, begun in 1922, had no influence at all upon the discovery of spin, simply because they were too imprecise.Rather, the concept of spin appeared after a long and tedious battle to understand the splitting patterns and separations in line spectra.Several people had for various reasons discussed classical models of rotating charge distributions but Kronig, in 1924, was the first to show that an electron with spin 1/2 would explain the pattern of what we would today call L • S splitting, as well as anomalies in the Zeeman effect.He realized, though, that the gyromagnetic ratio ( -ejmc) needed for the latter would give L • S splittings twice as big as those observed.It is said that Pauli expressed his negative reaction to Kronig's idea with such vehemence that Kronig never published his work (Mehra and Rechenberg, 1982).Soon thereafter, in 1925, the same idea occurred to Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit (1925), who proceeded to a detailed analysis of the splittings, concluding at first that everything worked beautifully, but then becoming aware, as a consequence of a comment by Heisenberg, of the factor-of-2 inconsistency mentioned above.
First, the experimental foundations for the existence of a new dynamical variable, the spin of particles, are presented. The Pauli equation is then derived in detail, two applications are given and the energy levels of a particle with spin in a constant magnetic field are studied. This is the analysis of Landau levels, which can be performed by using the known results on the spectrum of harmonic oscillators. In this chapter we also study in detail the addition of orbital angular momentum and spin, as well as the spin–orbit interaction with the resulting Thomas precession. Stern-Gerlach experiment and electron spin The hypothesis that the electron has an intrinsic magnetic moment and an angular momentum, in short a spin , was first suggested in Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit (1926). They noticed, even before the discovery of quantum mechanics, that a complete description of spectra was not possible unless a magnetic moment and a mechanical moment were ascribed to the electron, and hence the concept of an electron as a point charge was insufficient. First, let us therefore try to understand how a magnetic moment can be associated to an atomic system. For this purpose, consider for simplicity the Bohr model of an hydrogen atom, where the electron moves along a circular orbit and rotates with orbital angular momentum L .
In the introductory remarks to Chapter 5 mention was made of the 1925 proposal of Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit that to an electron there should be assigned an intrinsic angular momentum or spin S = (S x , S y , S z )—this in addition to its quantum angular momentum (or orbital angular momentum) M = (M x , M y , M z ) defined in (5.4.4). This is not to be taken to mean that an electron actually spins about an axis in some physical way. Experiments (in particular the noted Stern-Gerlach experiment) have provided adequate justification for the proposed concept of spin, a proposal also made by R. Bichowsky and H. Urey. Dirac has shown that the notion of spin is necessary if quantum mechanics and Einstein relativity are to be consistent theories. Chemical properties of atoms, and their ability to combine and form molecules, the splitting of spectral lines by a magnetic field applied to an atom (i.e., the Zeeman effect, which we discuss later), all depend on this important notion.
Abstract We have seen in the preceding episode that early in 1925 Pauli attributed to the electron a ‘classically not describable two-valuedness’. Within a few months this property of the electron was given a physical description which, it is true, is not satisfactory from the viewpoint of classical physics. This description is regarded as the discovery of the intrinsic angular momentum or spin of the electron. In fact the description was given twice. Already in January Kronig discussed it with Pauli who was completely opposed to the idea so that Kronig did not publish it. The concept of the electron spin was independently proposed and published [1] by Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit who thus became the discoverers of spin.
Abstract In 1921, Otto Stern conceived the idea for an experiment that would decide between a classical and a quantum description of atomic behavior, as epitomized by the Bohr–Sommerfeld–Debye model of the atom. This model entailed not only the quantization of the magnitude of the orbital electronic angular momentum but also of the projection of the angular momentum on an external magnetic field – the so‐called space quantization. Stern recognized that space quantization would have observable consequences: namely, that the magnetic dipole moment due to the orbital angular momentum would be space quantized as well, taking two opposite values for atoms whose only unpaired electron has just one quantum of orbital angular momentum. When acted upon by a suitable inhomogeneous magnetic field, a beam of such atoms would be split into two beams consisting of deflected atoms with opposite projections of the orbital angular momentum on the magnetic field. In contradistinction, if atoms behaved classically, the atomic beam would only broaden along the field gradient and have maximum intensity at zero deflection, i. e., where there would be a minimum or no intensity for a beam split due to space quantization. Stern anticipated that, although simple in principle, the experiment would be difficult to carry out – and invited Walther Gerlach to team up with him. Gerlach's realism and experimental skills together with his sometimes stubborn determination to make things work proved invaluable for the success of the Stern–Gerlach experiment (SGE). After a long struggle, Gerlach finally saw, on 8 February 1922, the splitting of a beam of silver atoms in a magnetic field. The absence of the concept of electron spin confused and confounded the interpretation of the SGE, as the silver atoms were, in fact, in a 2S state, with zero orbital and spin angular momentum. However, a key quantum feature whose existence the SGE was designed to test – namely space quantization of electronic angular momentum – was robust enough to transpire independent of whether the electronic angular momentum was orbital or due to spin. The SGE entails other key aspects of quantum mechanics such as quantum measurement, state preparation, coherence, and entanglement. Confronted with the outcome of the SGE, Stern noted: “I still have objections to the idea of beauty of quantum mechanics. But she is correct.”
Abstract In this chapter we discuss the intrinsic angular momentum called spin. Starting from the magnetic dipole moment related to orbital angular momentum, we focus on the hydrogen atom and consider the effect of an external magnetic field, resulting in Larmor precession and Zeeman splitting. We then turn to the discovery of spin in the Stern-Gerlach experiment. After providing a mathematical description of spin-1/2 systems in terms of two-component spinors and Pauli matrices, we illustrate projective measurements for the example of spin. The relationship between the Lie groups SU(2) and SO(3) is discussed in the context of the transformation of spinors under rotations. We analyse how the presence of spin alters the description of the hydrogen atom. Discussing the addition of angular momenta and the Pauli exclusion principle leads us to the structure of electronic orbitals. Finally, we discuss the occupation of electronic energy levels in heavier nuclei
In 1925 the concept of electron spin was introduced to explain two experimental observations: the splitting of silver atom beams in an inhomogeneous magnetic field (Stern–Gerlach, 1922), and the fine structure of atomic spectra. The physical picture proposed — an electron spinning on its own axis — was immediately shown by Hendrik Lorentz to require surface velocities exceeding the speed of light. The paper was published anyway. Dirac subsequently rescued the two-valuedness mathematically, whereupon the physical question was declared irrelevant. For one hundred years the field has been unable to state what spin physically is. This paper traces the sequence of observations, inferences, and decisions that produced this situation and identifies two distinct wrong turns. The first wrong turn was publishing a model known to be physically impossible. Lorentz's calculation was correct — at the classical electron radius (2.818 fm), the required surface velocity is 274 times the speed of light. But the classical radius is not the electron's physical rotation radius. The correct rotation radius, derived from the Sagnac closure condition, is 285.5 fm — 101 times larger. At that radius, the rotation velocity is 0.822c, the bare magnetic moment is 0.608 μB, and Lorentz's objection does not arise. Both values are computed explicitly with no free parameters. The second wrong turn was a conflation. The closure geometry of the electron involves two independent numerical facts, both related to the number ½: (1) the least-work oscillation path that closes the Sagnac phase condition is a two-lobe ellipse, giving a winding number of n = ½ in the mass equation; (2) the electron's S³ closure surface presents two poles to the external field, giving a topological factor of 2 in the g-factor. In 1925, both facts were numerically present in the spectroscopic data, but they were collapsed into a single postulate: intrinsic angular momentum ℏ/2. That collapse created a half-integer angular momentum with no classical analogue, forced Dirac to construct the SU(2) spinor formalism to accommodate it, and caused the spinor to appear as a new kind of mathematical object requiring new physics — when it was always a description of closure surface topology. Every experimental result attributed to spin-½ as an intrinsic quantum property — two spots in Stern–Gerlach, the electron magnetic moment, Pauli exclusion, and fine structure — is reproduced by real rotation with two stable orientations, without superluminal motion, without abstract mathematical structure disconnected from physical content, and without the hundred-year admission of ignorance that has accompanied the standard treatment. The mathematical apparatus of quantum mechanics — the Dirac equation, the Pauli matrices, the SU(2) structure — remains valid. What changes is the interpretation. The spinor is not a mysterious new object. It is the natural representation of the two-pole topology of the S³ closure surface. The conflation of 1925 prevented this from being seen. Related work: The Sagnac closure condition and the γcause invariant used in this paper are derived in: D. J. Hallman, "The Sagnac Formula Inverted Reveals Mass, Gravity, and Particle Structure," Zenodo (2026). doi:10.5281/zenodo.20193279