Talk:Azimuthal quantum number

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Physics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.

Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

I've replaced the term state with the more appropriate orbital, as state refers to the combined condition of all the electrons in the atom, rather than the one (or two) in the orbital.--Ian 08:21, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Contradiction with Electron shell

Please go to Talk:Electron shell#Contradiction with Azimuthal quantum number.

the azimuthal quantum number maybe could be merged with the orbital angular momentum quantum number as they are the same thing! agreed67.70.129.22 19:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Contradictory sentences in history section.

In the history section, is the following:

"Bohr argued that the angular momentum in any orbit n was nKh, where h is Planck's constant and K is some multiplying factor, the same for all the orbits, which was later determined to be 1/2π. The lowest quantum level therefore had an angular momentum of zero."

Since the lowest value for n is 1, we get L = h/2π, not zero.

The last sentence makes no sense, since according to the first sentence the angular momentum was not zero.

This should be sorted out, as the two sentences totally contradict each other.

This history section is very poor. There is the contradiction mentioned above, and most of the paragraph is concerned with things somewhat unrelated to the orbital quantum number. It desperately needs fixing, and for now I'll remove some of the worst chunks. --Latch.r 05:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proof needed

Can anybody put the proof of \mathbf{L^2\boldsymbol{\psi}} = \hbar^2{l(l+1)}\boldsymbol{\psi} into the article? --83.131.82.102 (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)