DOCSLIB.ORG

On the Classical Analysis of Spin-Orbit Coupling in Hydrogenlike Atoms A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On the Classical Analysis of Spin-Orbit Coupling in Hydrogenlike Atoms A On the classical analysis of spin-orbit coupling in hydrogenlike atoms A. L. Kholmetskii Department of Physics, Belarus State University, 4 Nezavisimosti Avenue, 220030 Minsk, Belarus and Okan University, Akfirat 34959, Istanbul, Turkey O. V. Missevitch Institute for Nuclear Problems, Belarus State University, 11 Bobruiskaya Street, 220030 Minsk, Belarus T. Yarman Department of Engineering, Okan University, Akfirat, Istanbul, Turkey and Savronik, Organize Sanayi 26100, Eskisehir, Turkey ͑Received 11 September 2009; accepted 3 December 2009͒ We reanalyze the usual classical derivation of spin-orbit coupling in hydrogenlike atoms. We point out the presence of an additional force exerted on a spinning electron due to the appearance of its electric dipole moment in the rest frame of the nucleus. This force has been ignored, although its inclusion in the electron’s equation of motion influences the energy level of an orbiting electron on an equal footing with other effects in the usual analysis of spin-orbit coupling. A fortuitous cancellation between two terms leaves the overall energy level unaffected, which explains in part why this effect has been overlooked. An account of this effect in the Bohr model produces the usual expression for the spin-orbit coupling but with different radii of the electron’s orbit for different spatial orientations of the electron’s spin. This result is in qualitative agreement with the solution of the Dirac–Coulomb equation for hydrogenlike atoms. © 2010 American Association of Physics Teachers. ͓DOI: 10.1119/1.3277052͔ I. INTRODUCTION In this paper we use the simplest version of the equation of motion of a particle with spin. An unambiguous solution of The classical analysis of spin-orbit coupling in hydrogen- this equation of motion is obtained with a constraint given by like atoms by Thomas1 played an important role in support- the second Bohr postulate. This solution shows that the cor- ing the hypothesis of electron spin as advanced by Uhlen- rections to the energy of spin-orbit interaction, although sig- beck and Goudsmit2 in 1925. The latter successfully nificant in magnitude, cancel fortuitously. This cancellation explained the multiplet structure of atom spectra and the yields the standard expression for the spin-orbit coupling but anomalous Zeeman effect based on an assumption about the also gives a correction to the radius of the electron’s orbit for different spatial orientations of the electron’s spin ͑see Sec. proper magnetic moment of the electron, which is associated III͒. This result is in qualitative agreement with the solution with the self-rotational motion of the electron ͑spin͒. How- of the Dirac–Coulomb equation for hydrogen–like atoms, for ever, their prediction of a spin-orbit coupling in the hydrogen which the radial part of the wave function depends on the atom was twice the measured value. This discrepancy was spin projection. removed by Thomas1 in 1926 by applying a classical relativ- istic approach. He pointed out that successive Lorentz trans- formations with noncollinear relative velocities entail an ad- II. CLASSICAL APPROACH TO SPIN-ORBIT ditional spatial rotation of the coordinate axes of the INTERACTION reference frames involved. In this way he showed that the doublet separation due to spin-orbit coupling is half the value In this section we present the common classical approach 2 derived by Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit ͑see Sec. II͒. Later the for deriving the energy of spin-orbit coupling following problem of spin-orbit interaction was solved by the relativ- Refs. 1 and 9 and their presentation in modern form10,11 and istic quantum electron theory of Dirac.3 Nonetheless, it is indicate the missing points in this analysis. comforting that this effect has a classical explanation espe- In Refs. 1 and 9 the spin-orbit coupling was understood as cially because the account of Thomas precession in the spin- a perturbation to the energy of hydrogenlike atoms, and the orbit coupling of the hydrogen atom is often considered a validity of the second Bohr postulate was tacitly implied. confirmation of special relativity,4,5 which is still of current The Bohr model assumes that the electron orbits the nucleus, interest ͑see Ref. 6 and references therein and Ref. 7͒. which is at rest in the laboratory frame K. In this frame the However, there remain some missing points in the classi- equation of motion for the electron with rest mass m and cal treatment of spin-orbit interaction. In particular, the ap- charge e is plication of the equation of motion for a spinless particle d Ze2r commonly adopted in such an analysis is incomplete because ͑mv͒ =− , ͑1͒ dt r3 the corrections to the energy of the electron have the same order of magnitude as the spin-orbit splitting. Such a situa- where v is the velocity of the electron, and Ze is the charge tion has a historical explanation: The classical electrodynam- of the nucleus. Equation ͑1͒ yields the well known result ics treatment of the motion of polarized particles in a non- mv2 = Ze2/r, ͑2͒ homogeneous electromagnetic field had been completed only in the 1960s.8 from which we can determine the total energy of the system, 428 Am. J. Phys. 78 ͑4͒, April 2010 http://aapt.org/ajp © 2010 American Association of Physics Teachers 428 2 2 2 ͑ ͒ mv Ze Ze Ke. In the nucleus rest frame laboratory frame K , Thomas U = − =− . ͑3͒ ␻ 2 r 2r found that the precession frequency is half of e. To deter- mine this result, Thomas used the definition of the angular The radius of the electron’s orbit can be found by the addi- rotation frequency tion of the second Bohr postulate to the purely classical treat- ␸͑t + dt͒ − ␸͑t͒ d␸ ment, ␻ = = ͑12͒ dt dt r = nប/mv, ͑4͒ ͑␸ ͒ where n in the principal quantum number and ប is Planck’s is the rotation angle and pointed out that the electron in constant. We combine Eqs. ͑3͒ and ͑4͒ and obtain the hydrogen atom experiences an acceleration and its veloc- ity varies with time. We can still apply special relativity by 2/ ͑ ͒ U =−Ze 2rn, 5 introducing a set of instantaneously comoving Lorentz K ␸͑t͒ where r =n2r and r =ប2 /mZe2 is the Bohr radius. Equation frames of the electron e. Thomas noted that the angles n B B ␸͑ ͒ ͑ ͒ ͑5͒ is well known and determines the gross structure of the and t+dt are measured in different Lorentz frames Ke t ͑ ͒ energy levels for hydrogenic atoms. and Ke t+dt , moving with a relative velocity in the radial In the usual classical treatment of spin-orbit coupling, its direction. Because successive Lorentz transformations → ͑ ͒→ ͑ ͒ contribution is considered as a perturbation to the energy in K Ke t Ke t+dt with noncollinear relative velocities Eq. ͑5͒, with the radius of the electron’s orbit fixed. Follow- involve additional spatial rotations of the coordinate axes of ͑ ͒ ing this approach, Thomas suggested writing the energy Us-o Ke t+dt with respect to the axes of K, the coordinate axes of of the spin-orbit coupling as the sum the rest frame of the electron rotate about the axes of the 1 ͑ ͒ laboratory frame K at the angular frequency Us-o = Up + UT, 6 1 where Up is the additional potential energy of the magnetic ␻ =− ͑v ϫ v˙͒, ͑13͒ moment of the electron in an electromagnetic field. The term T 2c2 UT was first found by Thomas and emerges due to the slow precession of the electron’s spin ͑Thomas precession͒.We which is the Thomas precession frequency. emphasize that both energy terms in Eq. ͑6͒ must be evalu- This approximate equation is valid within the accuracy of −2 ated in the same reference frame. Thomas started the analysis the calculations, c . We add that many publications give different expressions for the frequency of Thomas preces- in the electron rest frame Ke, wherein the apparent circular 6 motion of the nucleus induces the magnetic field sion. In particular, a recent review presented ten expressions ␻ for T. The problem partially issues from the fact that vari- ͑E ϫ v͒ Ze ous authors use different inertial frames of observation ͑ei- B = = ͑r ϫ v͒͑7͒ c2 c2r3 ther the frame comoving with the rotating particle or the laboratory frame͒ but do not indicate explicitly the frame ͑ −2 at the location of the electron to accuracy c , where c is the chosen. In addition, we should be alert to the correct succes- ͒ ͑ ͒ ͑ ͒ velocity of light in vacuum . We combine Eqs. 1 and 7 sion of transformations between different Lorentz frames be- and obtain cause Lorentz transformations are not commutative. To avoid 1 d these problems, which fall outside of the scope of this paper, B =− ͩ ͑mv͒ ϫ vͪ. ͑8͒ we restrict ourselves our calculations to the order ͑v/c͒2 for ec dt ␻ ͑ ͒ which all agree with the value of T in Eq. 13 . In agreement with the existence of the electron’s spin s, the By analogy with Eqs. ͑10͒ and ͑11͒, the energy associated magnetic moment ␮ of the electron takes the form with the precession of the electron’s spin is ge e ␮ · B ␮ = s = s, ͑9͒ U = . ͑14͒ 2m m T 2 where we have set the g-factor equal to 2 and neglected the The energy of spin-orbit coupling becomes ͓see Eqs. ͑6͒, small anomalous magnetic moment of the electron. Thus, in ͑10͒, and ͑14͔͒ the proper electron frame, the additional potential energy is equal to ␮ · B U = U + U =− , ͑15͒ ␮ ͑ ͒ s-o p T Up =− · B, 10 2 which causes the Larmor precession of the electron’s mag- which agrees with experimental observations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Applications of Magnetic Resonance to Current Detection and Microscale Flow Imaging Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2fw343zm Author Halpern-Manners, Nicholas Wm Publication Date 2011 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Applications of Magnetic Resonance to Current Detection and Microscale Flow Imaging by Nicholas Wm Halpern-Manners A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Chemistry in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Alexander Pines, Chair Professor David Wemmer Professor Steven Conolly Spring 2011 Applications of Magnetic Resonance to Current Detection and Microscale Flow Imaging Copyright 2011 by Nicholas Wm Halpern-Manners 1 Abstract Applications of Magnetic Resonance to Current Detection and Microscale Flow Imaging by Nicholas Wm Halpern-Manners Doctor of Philosophy in Chemistry University of California, Berkeley Professor Alexander Pines, Chair Magnetic resonance has evolved into a remarkably versatile technique, with major appli- cations in chemical analysis, molecular biology, and medical imaging. Despite these successes, there are a large number of areas where magnetic resonance has the potential to provide great insight but has run into significant obstacles in its application. The projects described in this thesis focus on two of these areas. First, I describe the development and implementa- tion of a robust imaging method which can directly detect the effects of oscillating electrical currents. This work is particularly relevant in the context of neuronal current detection, and bypasses many of the limitations of previously developed techniques.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Precession and Thomas-Wigner Rotation: Correct Solutions and Their Implications
    epl draft Header will be provided by the publisher This is a pre-print of an article published in Europhysics Letters 129 (2020) 3006 The final authenticated version is available online at: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1209/0295-5075/129/30006 Thomas precession and Thomas-Wigner rotation: correct solutions and their implications 1(a) 2 3 4 ALEXANDER KHOLMETSKII , OLEG MISSEVITCH , TOLGA YARMAN , METIN ARIK 1 Department of Physics, Belarusian State University – Nezavisimosti Avenue 4, 220030, Minsk, Belarus 2 Research Institute for Nuclear Problems, Belarusian State University –Bobrujskaya str., 11, 220030, Minsk, Belarus 3 Okan University, Akfirat, Istanbul, Turkey 4 Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey received and accepted dates provided by the publisher other relevant dates provided by the publisher PACS 03.30.+p – Special relativity Abstract – We address to the Thomas precession for the hydrogenlike atom and point out that in the derivation of this effect in the semi-classical approach, two different successions of rotation-free Lorentz transformations between the laboratory frame K and the proper electron’s frames, Ke(t) and Ke(t+dt), separated by the time interval dt, were used by different authors. We further show that the succession of Lorentz transformations KKe(t)Ke(t+dt) leads to relativistically non-adequate results in the frame Ke(t) with respect to the rotational frequency of the electron spin, and thus an alternative succession of transformations KKe(t), KKe(t+dt) must be applied. From the physical viewpoint this means the validity of the introduced “tracking rule”, when the rotation-free Lorentz transformation, being realized between the frame of observation K and the frame K(t) co-moving with a tracking object at the time moment t, remains in force at any future time moments, too.
    [Show full text]
  • Physics 9Hb: Special Relativity & Thermal/Statistical Physics
    PHYSICS 9HB: SPECIAL RELATIVITY & THERMAL/STATISTICAL PHYSICS Tom Weideman University of California, Davis UCD: Physics 9HB – Special Relativity and Thermal/Statistical Physics This text is disseminated via the Open Education Resource (OER) LibreTexts Project (https://LibreTexts.org) and like the hundreds of other texts available within this powerful platform, it freely available for reading, printing and "consuming." Most, but not all, pages in the library have licenses that may allow individuals to make changes, save, and print this book. Carefully consult the applicable license(s) before pursuing such effects. Instructors can adopt existing LibreTexts texts or Remix them to quickly build course-specific resources to meet the needs of their students. Unlike traditional textbooks, LibreTexts’ web based origins allow powerful integration of advanced features and new technologies to support learning. The LibreTexts mission is to unite students, faculty and scholars in a cooperative effort to develop an easy-to-use online platform for the construction, customization, and dissemination of OER content to reduce the burdens of unreasonable textbook costs to our students and society. The LibreTexts project is a multi-institutional collaborative venture to develop the next generation of open-access texts to improve postsecondary education at all levels of higher learning by developing an Open Access Resource environment. The project currently consists of 13 independently operating and interconnected libraries that are constantly being optimized by students, faculty, and outside experts to supplant conventional paper-based books. These free textbook alternatives are organized within a central environment that is both vertically (from advance to basic level) and horizontally (across different fields) integrated.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnetic Moment of a Spin, Its Equation of Motion, and Precession B1.1.6
    Magnetic Moment of a Spin, Its Equation of UNIT B1.1 Motion, and Precession OVERVIEW The ability to “see” protons using magnetic resonance imaging is predicated on the proton having a mass, a charge, and a nonzero spin. The spin of a particle is analogous to its intrinsic angular momentum. A simple way to explain angular momentum is that when an object rotates (e.g., an ice skater), that action generates an intrinsic angular momentum. If there were no friction in air or of the skates on the ice, the skater would spin forever. This intrinsic angular momentum is, in fact, a vector, not a scalar, and thus spin is also a vector. This intrinsic spin is always present. The direction of a spin vector is usually chosen by the right-hand rule. For example, if the ice skater is spinning from her right to left, then the spin vector is pointing up; the skater is rotating counterclockwise when viewed from the top. A key property determining the motion of a spin in a magnetic field is its magnetic moment. Once this is known, the motion of the magnetic moment and energy of the moment can be calculated. Actually, the spin of a particle with a charge and a mass leads to a magnetic moment. An intuitive way to understand the magnetic moment is to imagine a current loop lying in a plane (see Figure B1.1.1). If the loop has current I and an enclosed area A, then the magnetic moment is simply the product of the current and area (see Equation B1.1.8 in the Technical Discussion), with the direction n^ parallel to the normal direction of the plane.
    [Show full text]
  • Electron Spins in Nonmagnetic Semiconductors
    Electron spins in nonmagnetic semiconductors Yuichiro K. Kato Institute of Engineering Innovation, The University of Tokyo Physics of non-interacting spins Optical spin injection and detection Spin manipulation in nonmagnetic semiconductors Physics of non-interacting spins 2 In non-magnetic semiconductors such as GaAs and Si, spin interactions are weak; To first order approximation, they behave as non-interacting, independent spins. • Zeeman Hamiltonian • Bloch sphere • Larmor precession ∗ • , , and • Bloch equation The Zeeman Hamiltonian 3 Hamiltonian for an electron spin in a magnetic field magnetic moment of an electron spin : magnetic moment : magnetic field : Landé g-factor (=2 for free electrons) : Bohr magneton 58 eV/T , ) : electronic charge : Planck constant : free electron mass : spin operator : Pauli operator The Zeeman Hamiltonian 4 Hamiltonian for an electron spin in a magnetic field magnetic moment of an electron spin : magnetic moment : magnetic field : Landé g-factor (=2 for free electrons) : Bohr magneton 2 58 eV/T : electronic charge : Planck constant : free electron mass : spin operator 2 : Pauli operator The energy eigenstates 5 Without loss of generality, we can set the -axis to be the direction of , i.e., 0,0, 1 Spin “up” |↑ |↑ 2 1 2 2 1 Spin “down” |↓ |↓ 2 1 2 2 Spinor notation and the Pauli operators 6 Quantum states are represented by a normalized vector in a Hilbert space Spin states are represented by 2D vectors Spin operators are represented by 2x2 matrices.
    [Show full text]
  • Physics 200 Problem Set 7 Solution Quick Overview: Although Relativity Can Be a Little Bewildering, This Problem Set Uses Just A
    Physics 200 Problem Set 7 Solution Quick overview: Although relativity can be a little bewildering, this problem set uses just a few ideas over and over again, namely 1. Coordinates (x; t) in one frame are related to coordinates (x0; t0) in another frame by the Lorentz transformation formulas. 2. Similarly, space and time intervals (¢x; ¢t) in one frame are related to inter- vals (¢x0; ¢t0) in another frame by the same Lorentz transformation formu- las. Note that time dilation and length contraction are just special cases: it is time-dilation if ¢x = 0 and length contraction if ¢t = 0. 3. The spacetime interval (¢s)2 = (c¢t)2 ¡ (¢x)2 between two events is the same in every frame. 4. Energy and momentum are always conserved, and we can make e±cient use of this fact by writing them together in an energy-momentum vector P = (E=c; p) with the property P 2 = m2c2. In particular, if the mass is zero then P 2 = 0. 1. The earth and sun are 8.3 light-minutes apart. Ignore their relative motion for this problem and assume they live in a single inertial frame, the Earth-Sun frame. Events A and B occur at t = 0 on the earth and at 2 minutes on the sun respectively. Find the time di®erence between the events according to an observer moving at u = 0:8c from Earth to Sun. Repeat if observer is moving in the opposite direction at u = 0:8c. Answer: According to the formula for a Lorentz transformation, ³ u ´ 1 ¢tobserver = γ ¢tEarth-Sun ¡ ¢xEarth-Sun ; γ = p : c2 1 ¡ (u=c)2 Plugging in the numbers gives (notice that the c implicit in \light-minute" cancels the extra factor of c, which is why it's nice to measure distances in terms of the speed of light) 2 min ¡ 0:8(8:3 min) ¢tobserver = p = ¡7:7 min; 1 ¡ 0:82 which means that according to the observer, event B happened before event A! If we reverse the sign of u then 2 min + 0:8(8:3 min) ¢tobserver 2 = p = 14 min: 1 ¡ 0:82 2.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Nuclear Magnetic Resonance
    Chapter 4, page 1 4 Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Pieter Zeeman observed in 1896 the splitting of optical spectral lines in the field of an electromagnet. Since then, the splitting of energy levels proportional to an external magnetic field has been called the "Zeeman effect". The "Zeeman resonance effect" causes magnetic resonances which are classified under radio frequency spectroscopy (rf spectroscopy). In these resonances, the transitions between two branches of a single energy level split in an external magnetic field are measured in the megahertz and gigahertz range. In 1944, Jevgeni Konstantinovitch Savoiski discovered electron paramagnetic resonance. Shortly thereafter in 1945, nuclear magnetic resonance was demonstrated almost simultaneously in Boston by Edward Mills Purcell and in Stanford by Felix Bloch. Nuclear magnetic resonance was sometimes called nuclear induction or paramagnetic nuclear resonance. It is generally abbreviated to NMR. So as not to scare prospective patients in medicine, reference to the "nuclear" character of NMR is dropped and the magnetic resonance based imaging systems (scanner) found in hospitals are simply referred to as "magnetic resonance imaging" (MRI). 4.1 The Nuclear Resonance Effect Many atomic nuclei have spin, characterized by the nuclear spin quantum number I. The absolute value of the spin angular momentum is L =+h II(1). (4.01) The component in the direction of an applied field is Lz = Iz h ≡ m h. (4.02) The external field is usually defined along the z-direction. The magnetic quantum number is symbolized by Iz or m and can have 2I +1 values: Iz ≡ m = −I, −I+1, ..., I−1, I.
    [Show full text]
  • 8. Special Relativity
    8. Special Relativity Although Newtonian mechanics gives an excellent description of Nature, it is not uni- versally valid. When we reach extreme conditions — the very small, the very heavy or the very fast — the Newtonian Universe that we’re used to needs replacing. You could say that Newtonian mechanics encapsulates our common sense view of the world. One of the major themes of twentieth century physics is that when you look away from our everyday world, common sense is not much use. One such extreme is when particles travel very fast. The theory that replaces New- tonian mechanics is due to Einstein. It is called special relativity. The effects of special relativity become apparent only when the speeds of particles become comparable to the speed of light in the vacuum. Universally denoted as c, the speed of light is c = 299792458 ms−1 This value of c is exact. In fact, it would be more precise to say that this is the definition of what we mean by a meter: it is the distance travelled by light in 1/299792458 seconds. For the purposes of this course, we’ll be quite happy with the approximation c 3 108 ms−1. ≈ × The first thing to say is that the speed of light is fast. Really fast. The speed of sound is around 300 ms−1; escape velocity from the Earth is around 104 ms−1; the orbital speed of our solar system in the Milky Way galaxy is around 105 ms−1. As we shall soon see, nothing travels faster than c.
    [Show full text]
  • Optical Detection of Electron Spin Dynamics Driven by Fast Variations of a Magnetic Field
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Optical detection of electron spin dynamics driven by fast variations of a magnetic feld: a simple ∗ method to measure T1 , T2 , and T2 in semiconductors V. V. Belykh1*, D. R. Yakovlev2,3 & M. Bayer2,3 ∗ We develop a simple method for measuring the electron spin relaxation times T1 , T2 and T2 in semiconductors and demonstrate its exemplary application to n-type GaAs. Using an abrupt variation of the magnetic feld acting on electron spins, we detect the spin evolution by measuring the Faraday rotation of a short laser pulse. Depending on the magnetic feld orientation, this allows us to measure either the longitudinal spin relaxation time T1 or the inhomogeneous transverse spin dephasing time ∗ T2 . In order to determine the homogeneous spin coherence time T2 , we apply a pulse of an oscillating radiofrequency (rf) feld resonant with the Larmor frequency and detect the subsequent decay of the spin precession. The amplitude of the rf-driven spin precession is signifcantly enhanced upon additional optical pumping along the magnetic feld. Te electron spin dynamics in semiconductors can be addressed by a number of versatile methods involving electromagnetic radiation either in the optical range, resonant with interband transitions, or in the microwave as well as radiofrequency (rf) range, resonant with the Zeeman splitting1,2. For a long time, the optical methods were mostly represented by Hanle efect measurements giving access to the spin relaxation time at zero magnetic feld3. New techniques giving access both to the spin g factor and relaxation times at arbitrary magnetic felds have been very actively developed.
    [Show full text]
  • Griffith's Example 4.3: Larmor Precession We Will Be Considering the Spin of an Electron
    Griffith's Example 4.3: Larmor Precession We will be considering the spin of an electron. The operator for the component of spin in the rˆ = (sin cosijˆˆ sin sin cosˆ ) k cos sin ei cos(½ ) leading to Sˆ which has an eigen-spinor rˆ rˆ i i sin e cos sin(½ )e i rˆ sin(½ )e with eigenvalue ½ and with eigenvalue -½ . We can imagine a cos(½ ) state in which the spin is initially in the x-z plane and makes an angle relative to the cos(½ ) z axis so (0) . sin(½ ) First we consider an applied magnetic field in the z direction providing interaction ˆ ˆ energy: H Bkozo SB Bmos. Using the standard eigenstates of Sz, ½0 B ˆ o H 0½ Bo Note that the difference between the energies of the spin up and spin down states is Bo. We expect things to oscillate at frequencies corresponding to the energy differences so the frequency for this problem is Bo, the Larmor frequency. The frequencies associated with the two states have a magnitude of one-half of the Larmor frequency; the difference between the frequencies is the relevant frequency for oscillation of probability density or, in this case, precessing. The hamiltonian is diagonal so the spin z up and down states are the eigenfunctions. a ½it ½0 Bo a cos(½ )e Hiˆ it () t t b ½it 0½ Bo b t sin(½ )e where = Bo . The expectation values can be computed with the results: Sz(t) = cos() ( /2); Sx(t) = sin() ( /2) sin(t);Sy(t) = -sin() ( /2) cos(t) Exercise: Compute Sz(t) and Sx(t) for(t) given above.
    [Show full text]
  • II Spins and Their Dynamics
    For the spins to precess, and for us to detect them, II we need to somehow force them away from Spins and their equilibrium – for example, make them perpendicular to the main field: Dynamics Lecture notes by Assaf Tal B0 1. Excitation 1.1 WhyU Excite? If we do this and let them be, two things will Let us recant the facts from the previous lecture: happen: 1 1. We’re interested in the bulk 1. They will precess about B0 at a rate gB0. (macroscopic) magnetization. 2. Eventually they will return to equilibrium 2. When put in a constant magnetic field, because of thermal relaxation. This this bulk magnetization tends to align usually takes ~ 1sec, but can vary. itself along the field: Until they return to thermal equilibrium their signal is “up for grabs”, which is precisely the idea of a basic NMR/MRI experiment: B0 1. Excite the spins. 2. Measure until they return to sum equilibrium. What to exactly do with the measured signal and how to recover an image from it is something we’ll discuss in subsequent lectures. Meanwhile, let’s Microscopic Macroscopic just ask ourselves how can one excite a spin? That is, how can one tilt it from its equilibrium position along the main field and create an angle between 3. The macroscopic magnetization precesses them (usually 90 degrees, but not always)? about the external magnetic field. 1.2 TheU RF Coils In MRI, we can only detect a signal from the spins if they precess and therefore induce a current in Fortunately (or perhaps unfortunately), our our MRI receiver coils by Faraday’s law.
    [Show full text]
  • (Special) Relativity
    (Special) Relativity With very strong emphasis on electrodynamics and accelerators Better: How can we deal with moving charged particles ? Werner Herr, CERN Reading Material [1 ]R.P. Feynman, Feynman lectures on Physics, Vol. 1 + 2, (Basic Books, 2011). [2 ]A. Einstein, Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter K¨orper, Ann. Phys. 17, (1905). [3 ]L. Landau, E. Lifschitz, The Classical Theory of Fields, Vol2. (Butterworth-Heinemann, 1975) [4 ]J. Freund, Special Relativity, (World Scientific, 2008). [5 ]J.D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics (Wiley, 1998 ..) [6 ]J. Hafele and R. Keating, Science 177, (1972) 166. Why Special Relativity ? We have to deal with moving charges in accelerators Electromagnetism and fundamental laws of classical mechanics show inconsistencies Ad hoc introduction of Lorentz force Applied to moving bodies Maxwell’s equations lead to asymmetries [2] not shown in observations of electromagnetic phenomena Classical EM-theory not consistent with Quantum theory Important for beam dynamics and machine design: Longitudinal dynamics (e.g. transition, ...) Collective effects (e.g. space charge, beam-beam, ...) Dynamics and luminosity in colliders Particle lifetime and decay (e.g. µ, π, Z0, Higgs, ...) Synchrotron radiation and light sources ... We need a formalism to get all that ! OUTLINE Principle of Relativity (Newton, Galilei) - Motivation, Ideas and Terminology - Formalism, Examples Principle of Special Relativity (Einstein) - Postulates, Formalism and Consequences - Four-vectors and applications (Electromagnetism and accelerators) § ¤ some slides are for your private study and pleasure and I shall go fast there ¦ ¥ Enjoy yourself .. Setting the scene (terminology) .. To describe an observation and physics laws we use: - Space coordinates: ~x = (x, y, z) (not necessarily Cartesian) - Time: t What is a ”Frame”: - Where we observe physical phenomena and properties as function of their position ~x and time t.
    [Show full text]