Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

A dipole without angular momentum can simply rotate to align with the field (through it would oscillate unless it could shed energy). One with angular momentum cannot. Why?

Short Answer

Expert verified

If it already has angular momentum along the xyplane, then the change in angular momentum will also be the xyplane.

Step by step solution

01

Explanation

Therefore, the field (along the z-axis) is perpendicular to the change in angular momentum. Assume the field lies along the x-axis and the dipole moment vector is on the xy- plane.

02

Change in angular momentum.

If the dipole without angular momentum aligns, the field along the z-axis will be perpendicular to the change in angular momentum. If it already has angular momentum along the xyplane, then a change in angular momentum will also be along the xyplane.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Question: Bearing in mind its limiting cases of 1 and 2 mentioned in section 8.8, how would you describe the significance of the Lande g-factor

Consider Z=19potassium. As a rough approximation assume that each of itsn=1electron s orbits 19 pro. tons and half an electron-that is, on average, half its fellown=1electron. Assume that each of itsn=2electrons orbits 19 protons, two Is electrons. and half of the seven othern=2electrons. Continue the process, assuming that electrons at eachorbit a correspondingly reduced positive charge. (At each, an electron also orbits some of the electron clouds of higher. but we ignore this in our rough approximation.)

(a) Calculate in terms ofa0the orbit radii of hydrogenlike atoms of these effective Z,

(b) The radius of potassium is often quoted at around0.22nm. In view of this, are yourn=1throughn=3radii reasonable?

(c) About how many more protons would have to be "unscreened" to then=4electron to agree with the quoted radius of potassium? Considering the shape of its orbit, should potassium'sn=4electron orbit entirely outside all the lower-electrons?

Question: As indicated to remove one of the heliumโ€™s electrons requires24.6eV of energy when orbiting -24.6eV? Why or why not?

The radius of cesium is roughly0.26nm.

(a) From this estimate the effective charge its valence electron orbits

(b) Given the nature of the electron's orbit. is this effective nuclearcharge reasonable?

(c) Compare this effective Zwith that obtained for sodium in Example 8.3. Are the values at odds with the evidence given in Figure8.16that it takes less energy to remove an electron from cesium than from sodium? Explain.

The hydrogen spin-orbit interaction energy given in equation (8-25) is (ฮผ0e2/4ฯ€mr2r3)S. L. Using a reasonable value for in terms of a0and the relationships S=32and L=ฮต(โ„“+1)h, show that this energy is proportional to a typical hydrogen atom energy by the factorฮฑ2 . where ฮฑis the fine structure constant.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Physics Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free