In a spherically symmetric central potential why do we look for eigenfunctions of the angular momentum...












2












$begingroup$


In finding the solutions to the wave equation for a spherically symmetric potential $V(r)$, we look for the eigenfunctions of $hat L^2$ and $hat L_z$ operators. However, what is the reasoning behind this? The time-independent Schrodinger equation:
$$hat H Psi = E Psi$$



This is an eigenvalue equation and any eigenfunction of $hat H$ this equation is obviously a solution for this equation. Now when there is a spherically symmetric potential $V(r)$, I understand that because of separation of variables we can look for solutions of the form:
$$Psi (vec r,theta, phi) = R(vec r) Y(theta, phi)$$



Now to find the angular part why do we look for eigenstates of $hat L^2$ and $hat L_z$ operators (I know that they commute)?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    2












    $begingroup$


    In finding the solutions to the wave equation for a spherically symmetric potential $V(r)$, we look for the eigenfunctions of $hat L^2$ and $hat L_z$ operators. However, what is the reasoning behind this? The time-independent Schrodinger equation:
    $$hat H Psi = E Psi$$



    This is an eigenvalue equation and any eigenfunction of $hat H$ this equation is obviously a solution for this equation. Now when there is a spherically symmetric potential $V(r)$, I understand that because of separation of variables we can look for solutions of the form:
    $$Psi (vec r,theta, phi) = R(vec r) Y(theta, phi)$$



    Now to find the angular part why do we look for eigenstates of $hat L^2$ and $hat L_z$ operators (I know that they commute)?










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$


      In finding the solutions to the wave equation for a spherically symmetric potential $V(r)$, we look for the eigenfunctions of $hat L^2$ and $hat L_z$ operators. However, what is the reasoning behind this? The time-independent Schrodinger equation:
      $$hat H Psi = E Psi$$



      This is an eigenvalue equation and any eigenfunction of $hat H$ this equation is obviously a solution for this equation. Now when there is a spherically symmetric potential $V(r)$, I understand that because of separation of variables we can look for solutions of the form:
      $$Psi (vec r,theta, phi) = R(vec r) Y(theta, phi)$$



      Now to find the angular part why do we look for eigenstates of $hat L^2$ and $hat L_z$ operators (I know that they commute)?










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      In finding the solutions to the wave equation for a spherically symmetric potential $V(r)$, we look for the eigenfunctions of $hat L^2$ and $hat L_z$ operators. However, what is the reasoning behind this? The time-independent Schrodinger equation:
      $$hat H Psi = E Psi$$



      This is an eigenvalue equation and any eigenfunction of $hat H$ this equation is obviously a solution for this equation. Now when there is a spherically symmetric potential $V(r)$, I understand that because of separation of variables we can look for solutions of the form:
      $$Psi (vec r,theta, phi) = R(vec r) Y(theta, phi)$$



      Now to find the angular part why do we look for eigenstates of $hat L^2$ and $hat L_z$ operators (I know that they commute)?







      quantum-mechanics hilbert-space wavefunction schroedinger-equation spherical-harmonics






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 5 mins ago









      Qmechanic

      103k121871183




      103k121871183










      asked 7 hours ago









      daljit97daljit97

      16013




      16013






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4












          $begingroup$

          Well, to put it shortly, it's just because $L^2$ and $L_z$ are two observables that have no $r$ dependence. Since the kinetic terms of $H$ can be written as functions of $r$ and $L^2$, and the potential depends only on $r$, it is clear that the Hamiltonian commutes with the angular momenta. As such, it makes sense to write down $Y$ in terms of these two.



          But if we'd like to go a little deeper, it is a bit related to representation theory. The fact that $L^2$ and $L_z$ form a complete description of vector rotations (they represent the Lie algebra $mathfrak{so}(3)$ of the Lie group $mathrm{SO}(3)$) and therefore are the most natural way to express the angular dependence of a rotation-invariant space in terms of orthonormalizable functions.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            and then how do we know that their eigenfunctions will be eigenfunctions of $hat H$?
            $endgroup$
            – daljit97
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @daljit97 see the edit. Rotational invariance of the space (i.e. the potential) guarantees we can find eigenstates of $H$ in this manner. Or you could simply argue that, given that $L^2$ and $L_z$ do not depend on $r$, and $H$ has potential terms that depend only on $r$, the angular momenta have to commute with $H$ (they have a common eigenbasis)
            $endgroup$
            – Gabriel Golfetti
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @daljit97 Commuting operators have simultaneous eigenstates
            $endgroup$
            – Aaron Stevens
            6 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AaronStevens yes, that's true. However, that doesn't imply that any eigenstate of $L^2$ will be an eigenstate of $H$. Commuting operators have simultaneous states, but not the same eigenstates. Am I right?
            $endgroup$
            – daljit97
            6 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @dajit97 right, you may have an eigenstate of one that is not an eigenstate of the other because of degeneracy. but then you just change your basis and everything works out fine.
            $endgroup$
            – Gabriel Golfetti
            4 hours ago



















          1












          $begingroup$

          One objective of quantum mechanics is to fully labelled states of the system. In some cases energy is not enough: for instance in the hydrogen atom some energy levels occur more than once; the same happens in the 3d harmonic oscillator. In such cases, simply giving the energy is not enough to completely identify the state so we look for other ``quantum numbers'' to refine the identification.



          Of course one would prefer to label states with constants of motion, since they are constant so what we call state $nell m$ at the start we can use the same name at the end. Hence the idea of using a complete set of commuting operators - the Hamiltonian and others that commute with it - so as to uniquely identify the quantum states with constants of motion.



          Of course when the potential is spherical $V(r)$, what enters in the radial part of the Schrödinger equation is actually the effective potential
          $$
          V_{eff }=V(r)+frac{hbar^2}{2m}frac{ell(ell+1)}{r^2} tag{1}
          $$

          and so you see that the radial Schrödinger equation actually explicitly contains an angular momentum part so it is quite natural to look for functions $psi(r,theta,phi)$ which are also eigenfunctions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ of $hat L^2$ as these will provide the correct extra factor in Eq.(1) when separating the variables. Since there are many functions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ with the same $hbar^2ell(ell+1)$, one uses the eigenvalue $hbar m$ of $hat L_z$ to distinguish them.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "151"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f457359%2fin-a-spherically-symmetric-central-potential-why-do-we-look-for-eigenfunctions-o%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            4












            $begingroup$

            Well, to put it shortly, it's just because $L^2$ and $L_z$ are two observables that have no $r$ dependence. Since the kinetic terms of $H$ can be written as functions of $r$ and $L^2$, and the potential depends only on $r$, it is clear that the Hamiltonian commutes with the angular momenta. As such, it makes sense to write down $Y$ in terms of these two.



            But if we'd like to go a little deeper, it is a bit related to representation theory. The fact that $L^2$ and $L_z$ form a complete description of vector rotations (they represent the Lie algebra $mathfrak{so}(3)$ of the Lie group $mathrm{SO}(3)$) and therefore are the most natural way to express the angular dependence of a rotation-invariant space in terms of orthonormalizable functions.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              and then how do we know that their eigenfunctions will be eigenfunctions of $hat H$?
              $endgroup$
              – daljit97
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @daljit97 see the edit. Rotational invariance of the space (i.e. the potential) guarantees we can find eigenstates of $H$ in this manner. Or you could simply argue that, given that $L^2$ and $L_z$ do not depend on $r$, and $H$ has potential terms that depend only on $r$, the angular momenta have to commute with $H$ (they have a common eigenbasis)
              $endgroup$
              – Gabriel Golfetti
              7 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @daljit97 Commuting operators have simultaneous eigenstates
              $endgroup$
              – Aaron Stevens
              6 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @AaronStevens yes, that's true. However, that doesn't imply that any eigenstate of $L^2$ will be an eigenstate of $H$. Commuting operators have simultaneous states, but not the same eigenstates. Am I right?
              $endgroup$
              – daljit97
              6 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @dajit97 right, you may have an eigenstate of one that is not an eigenstate of the other because of degeneracy. but then you just change your basis and everything works out fine.
              $endgroup$
              – Gabriel Golfetti
              4 hours ago
















            4












            $begingroup$

            Well, to put it shortly, it's just because $L^2$ and $L_z$ are two observables that have no $r$ dependence. Since the kinetic terms of $H$ can be written as functions of $r$ and $L^2$, and the potential depends only on $r$, it is clear that the Hamiltonian commutes with the angular momenta. As such, it makes sense to write down $Y$ in terms of these two.



            But if we'd like to go a little deeper, it is a bit related to representation theory. The fact that $L^2$ and $L_z$ form a complete description of vector rotations (they represent the Lie algebra $mathfrak{so}(3)$ of the Lie group $mathrm{SO}(3)$) and therefore are the most natural way to express the angular dependence of a rotation-invariant space in terms of orthonormalizable functions.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              and then how do we know that their eigenfunctions will be eigenfunctions of $hat H$?
              $endgroup$
              – daljit97
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @daljit97 see the edit. Rotational invariance of the space (i.e. the potential) guarantees we can find eigenstates of $H$ in this manner. Or you could simply argue that, given that $L^2$ and $L_z$ do not depend on $r$, and $H$ has potential terms that depend only on $r$, the angular momenta have to commute with $H$ (they have a common eigenbasis)
              $endgroup$
              – Gabriel Golfetti
              7 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @daljit97 Commuting operators have simultaneous eigenstates
              $endgroup$
              – Aaron Stevens
              6 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @AaronStevens yes, that's true. However, that doesn't imply that any eigenstate of $L^2$ will be an eigenstate of $H$. Commuting operators have simultaneous states, but not the same eigenstates. Am I right?
              $endgroup$
              – daljit97
              6 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @dajit97 right, you may have an eigenstate of one that is not an eigenstate of the other because of degeneracy. but then you just change your basis and everything works out fine.
              $endgroup$
              – Gabriel Golfetti
              4 hours ago














            4












            4








            4





            $begingroup$

            Well, to put it shortly, it's just because $L^2$ and $L_z$ are two observables that have no $r$ dependence. Since the kinetic terms of $H$ can be written as functions of $r$ and $L^2$, and the potential depends only on $r$, it is clear that the Hamiltonian commutes with the angular momenta. As such, it makes sense to write down $Y$ in terms of these two.



            But if we'd like to go a little deeper, it is a bit related to representation theory. The fact that $L^2$ and $L_z$ form a complete description of vector rotations (they represent the Lie algebra $mathfrak{so}(3)$ of the Lie group $mathrm{SO}(3)$) and therefore are the most natural way to express the angular dependence of a rotation-invariant space in terms of orthonormalizable functions.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            Well, to put it shortly, it's just because $L^2$ and $L_z$ are two observables that have no $r$ dependence. Since the kinetic terms of $H$ can be written as functions of $r$ and $L^2$, and the potential depends only on $r$, it is clear that the Hamiltonian commutes with the angular momenta. As such, it makes sense to write down $Y$ in terms of these two.



            But if we'd like to go a little deeper, it is a bit related to representation theory. The fact that $L^2$ and $L_z$ form a complete description of vector rotations (they represent the Lie algebra $mathfrak{so}(3)$ of the Lie group $mathrm{SO}(3)$) and therefore are the most natural way to express the angular dependence of a rotation-invariant space in terms of orthonormalizable functions.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited 7 hours ago

























            answered 7 hours ago









            Gabriel GolfettiGabriel Golfetti

            1,2871713




            1,2871713












            • $begingroup$
              and then how do we know that their eigenfunctions will be eigenfunctions of $hat H$?
              $endgroup$
              – daljit97
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @daljit97 see the edit. Rotational invariance of the space (i.e. the potential) guarantees we can find eigenstates of $H$ in this manner. Or you could simply argue that, given that $L^2$ and $L_z$ do not depend on $r$, and $H$ has potential terms that depend only on $r$, the angular momenta have to commute with $H$ (they have a common eigenbasis)
              $endgroup$
              – Gabriel Golfetti
              7 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @daljit97 Commuting operators have simultaneous eigenstates
              $endgroup$
              – Aaron Stevens
              6 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @AaronStevens yes, that's true. However, that doesn't imply that any eigenstate of $L^2$ will be an eigenstate of $H$. Commuting operators have simultaneous states, but not the same eigenstates. Am I right?
              $endgroup$
              – daljit97
              6 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @dajit97 right, you may have an eigenstate of one that is not an eigenstate of the other because of degeneracy. but then you just change your basis and everything works out fine.
              $endgroup$
              – Gabriel Golfetti
              4 hours ago


















            • $begingroup$
              and then how do we know that their eigenfunctions will be eigenfunctions of $hat H$?
              $endgroup$
              – daljit97
              7 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @daljit97 see the edit. Rotational invariance of the space (i.e. the potential) guarantees we can find eigenstates of $H$ in this manner. Or you could simply argue that, given that $L^2$ and $L_z$ do not depend on $r$, and $H$ has potential terms that depend only on $r$, the angular momenta have to commute with $H$ (they have a common eigenbasis)
              $endgroup$
              – Gabriel Golfetti
              7 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @daljit97 Commuting operators have simultaneous eigenstates
              $endgroup$
              – Aaron Stevens
              6 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @AaronStevens yes, that's true. However, that doesn't imply that any eigenstate of $L^2$ will be an eigenstate of $H$. Commuting operators have simultaneous states, but not the same eigenstates. Am I right?
              $endgroup$
              – daljit97
              6 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @dajit97 right, you may have an eigenstate of one that is not an eigenstate of the other because of degeneracy. but then you just change your basis and everything works out fine.
              $endgroup$
              – Gabriel Golfetti
              4 hours ago
















            $begingroup$
            and then how do we know that their eigenfunctions will be eigenfunctions of $hat H$?
            $endgroup$
            – daljit97
            7 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            and then how do we know that their eigenfunctions will be eigenfunctions of $hat H$?
            $endgroup$
            – daljit97
            7 hours ago












            $begingroup$
            @daljit97 see the edit. Rotational invariance of the space (i.e. the potential) guarantees we can find eigenstates of $H$ in this manner. Or you could simply argue that, given that $L^2$ and $L_z$ do not depend on $r$, and $H$ has potential terms that depend only on $r$, the angular momenta have to commute with $H$ (they have a common eigenbasis)
            $endgroup$
            – Gabriel Golfetti
            7 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            @daljit97 see the edit. Rotational invariance of the space (i.e. the potential) guarantees we can find eigenstates of $H$ in this manner. Or you could simply argue that, given that $L^2$ and $L_z$ do not depend on $r$, and $H$ has potential terms that depend only on $r$, the angular momenta have to commute with $H$ (they have a common eigenbasis)
            $endgroup$
            – Gabriel Golfetti
            7 hours ago




            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            @daljit97 Commuting operators have simultaneous eigenstates
            $endgroup$
            – Aaron Stevens
            6 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            @daljit97 Commuting operators have simultaneous eigenstates
            $endgroup$
            – Aaron Stevens
            6 hours ago












            $begingroup$
            @AaronStevens yes, that's true. However, that doesn't imply that any eigenstate of $L^2$ will be an eigenstate of $H$. Commuting operators have simultaneous states, but not the same eigenstates. Am I right?
            $endgroup$
            – daljit97
            6 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            @AaronStevens yes, that's true. However, that doesn't imply that any eigenstate of $L^2$ will be an eigenstate of $H$. Commuting operators have simultaneous states, but not the same eigenstates. Am I right?
            $endgroup$
            – daljit97
            6 hours ago




            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            @dajit97 right, you may have an eigenstate of one that is not an eigenstate of the other because of degeneracy. but then you just change your basis and everything works out fine.
            $endgroup$
            – Gabriel Golfetti
            4 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            @dajit97 right, you may have an eigenstate of one that is not an eigenstate of the other because of degeneracy. but then you just change your basis and everything works out fine.
            $endgroup$
            – Gabriel Golfetti
            4 hours ago











            1












            $begingroup$

            One objective of quantum mechanics is to fully labelled states of the system. In some cases energy is not enough: for instance in the hydrogen atom some energy levels occur more than once; the same happens in the 3d harmonic oscillator. In such cases, simply giving the energy is not enough to completely identify the state so we look for other ``quantum numbers'' to refine the identification.



            Of course one would prefer to label states with constants of motion, since they are constant so what we call state $nell m$ at the start we can use the same name at the end. Hence the idea of using a complete set of commuting operators - the Hamiltonian and others that commute with it - so as to uniquely identify the quantum states with constants of motion.



            Of course when the potential is spherical $V(r)$, what enters in the radial part of the Schrödinger equation is actually the effective potential
            $$
            V_{eff }=V(r)+frac{hbar^2}{2m}frac{ell(ell+1)}{r^2} tag{1}
            $$

            and so you see that the radial Schrödinger equation actually explicitly contains an angular momentum part so it is quite natural to look for functions $psi(r,theta,phi)$ which are also eigenfunctions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ of $hat L^2$ as these will provide the correct extra factor in Eq.(1) when separating the variables. Since there are many functions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ with the same $hbar^2ell(ell+1)$, one uses the eigenvalue $hbar m$ of $hat L_z$ to distinguish them.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              1












              $begingroup$

              One objective of quantum mechanics is to fully labelled states of the system. In some cases energy is not enough: for instance in the hydrogen atom some energy levels occur more than once; the same happens in the 3d harmonic oscillator. In such cases, simply giving the energy is not enough to completely identify the state so we look for other ``quantum numbers'' to refine the identification.



              Of course one would prefer to label states with constants of motion, since they are constant so what we call state $nell m$ at the start we can use the same name at the end. Hence the idea of using a complete set of commuting operators - the Hamiltonian and others that commute with it - so as to uniquely identify the quantum states with constants of motion.



              Of course when the potential is spherical $V(r)$, what enters in the radial part of the Schrödinger equation is actually the effective potential
              $$
              V_{eff }=V(r)+frac{hbar^2}{2m}frac{ell(ell+1)}{r^2} tag{1}
              $$

              and so you see that the radial Schrödinger equation actually explicitly contains an angular momentum part so it is quite natural to look for functions $psi(r,theta,phi)$ which are also eigenfunctions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ of $hat L^2$ as these will provide the correct extra factor in Eq.(1) when separating the variables. Since there are many functions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ with the same $hbar^2ell(ell+1)$, one uses the eigenvalue $hbar m$ of $hat L_z$ to distinguish them.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                1












                1








                1





                $begingroup$

                One objective of quantum mechanics is to fully labelled states of the system. In some cases energy is not enough: for instance in the hydrogen atom some energy levels occur more than once; the same happens in the 3d harmonic oscillator. In such cases, simply giving the energy is not enough to completely identify the state so we look for other ``quantum numbers'' to refine the identification.



                Of course one would prefer to label states with constants of motion, since they are constant so what we call state $nell m$ at the start we can use the same name at the end. Hence the idea of using a complete set of commuting operators - the Hamiltonian and others that commute with it - so as to uniquely identify the quantum states with constants of motion.



                Of course when the potential is spherical $V(r)$, what enters in the radial part of the Schrödinger equation is actually the effective potential
                $$
                V_{eff }=V(r)+frac{hbar^2}{2m}frac{ell(ell+1)}{r^2} tag{1}
                $$

                and so you see that the radial Schrödinger equation actually explicitly contains an angular momentum part so it is quite natural to look for functions $psi(r,theta,phi)$ which are also eigenfunctions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ of $hat L^2$ as these will provide the correct extra factor in Eq.(1) when separating the variables. Since there are many functions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ with the same $hbar^2ell(ell+1)$, one uses the eigenvalue $hbar m$ of $hat L_z$ to distinguish them.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                One objective of quantum mechanics is to fully labelled states of the system. In some cases energy is not enough: for instance in the hydrogen atom some energy levels occur more than once; the same happens in the 3d harmonic oscillator. In such cases, simply giving the energy is not enough to completely identify the state so we look for other ``quantum numbers'' to refine the identification.



                Of course one would prefer to label states with constants of motion, since they are constant so what we call state $nell m$ at the start we can use the same name at the end. Hence the idea of using a complete set of commuting operators - the Hamiltonian and others that commute with it - so as to uniquely identify the quantum states with constants of motion.



                Of course when the potential is spherical $V(r)$, what enters in the radial part of the Schrödinger equation is actually the effective potential
                $$
                V_{eff }=V(r)+frac{hbar^2}{2m}frac{ell(ell+1)}{r^2} tag{1}
                $$

                and so you see that the radial Schrödinger equation actually explicitly contains an angular momentum part so it is quite natural to look for functions $psi(r,theta,phi)$ which are also eigenfunctions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ of $hat L^2$ as these will provide the correct extra factor in Eq.(1) when separating the variables. Since there are many functions $Y^ell_m(theta,phi)$ with the same $hbar^2ell(ell+1)$, one uses the eigenvalue $hbar m$ of $hat L_z$ to distinguish them.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered 2 hours ago









                ZeroTheHeroZeroTheHero

                19.3k53159




                19.3k53159






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f457359%2fin-a-spherically-symmetric-central-potential-why-do-we-look-for-eigenfunctions-o%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    How to make a Squid Proxy server?

                    Is this a new Fibonacci Identity?

                    19世紀