This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
I'm by no means an expert, but according to my class notes, Can someone take a look at this? Confuted —Preceding undated comment added 02:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
I see written " the electron is a spin one-half particle: " quoting the magnitude of S (large S denotes electron spin) to be hbar/2. I think this should be sqrt(s*(s+1))hbar =
where small is the spin quantum number = 1/2.
(Mark, 2011-11-21)
I have same idea. Value in the text (hbar/2) is just for z-component of spin vector. Someone mishmashed two thinks together. The last two formulas are wrong. total (spin) mag. moment = g-factor * bohr_magnetron * sqrt(3/4). z-component = g-factor * bohr_magnetron /2 =approx.= bohr_magnetron — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.102.60.126 (talk) 17:26, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
What is written in the article is correct. We only care about the z component of the magnetic moment, since it is understood that a particle cannot simultaneously be in an eigenstate of more than one spin component. Jcline1 (talk) 01:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)jcline1
About two thirds of the way down the page is the sentence "Where gs = 2 in Dirac mechanics, but is slightly larger due to Quantum Electrodynamic effects and where B is the magnetic field, μB is the Bohr magneton." which pertains to the equation immediately before it. B doesn't appear in this equation, whereas s (I presume spin) does. Does the fact that gs is about two and s is a half mean that prior to the advent of QED and the deviation of gs from 2 the magnetic moment of the electron was the Bohr magneton?--Chris 21:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
WHY DO MAGNETS EXIST AS DIPOLES? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.65.196 (talk) 10:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
This article incorrectly states that the g-factor and the gyromagnetic ratio are one and the same. This is not correct. The g-factor is dimensionless, while the gyromagnetic ratio is not. 131.162.134.11 17:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC) Donald Jones (Acadia U)
g-factors The article seems to equate the g-factor to the spin g-factor. There appears to be the spin magnetic moment g-factor, the orbital magnetic moment g-factor and the total magnetic moment g-factor. The Lande g-factor seems to be for the total magnetic moment. Someone needs to clarify this. Chibibrain (talk) 20:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Jcwf (talk) 23:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Dear Editor, Would you please write down the actual magnetic energy due to electron spin? In addition, please write down the predicted magnetic energy due to electron spin based on classical mechanics. And, would you please give me some references about how classical mechanics derives magnetic energy for electron spin? Thank you very much.
Sincerely, Wanchung —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wanchung Hu (talk • contribs) 09:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
The value given for the spin g-factor in this article (2.00231930419922) differs from that shown in the article on the g-factor (−2.0023193043622). Why the difference? Also, the NIST references yield a blank page. Parveson (talk) 03:04, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
See here, thanks. F = q(E+v×B) ⇄ ∑ici 10:19, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
This page is only for physicists and explains nothing to a layman. An encyclopedia should not only be for experts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:F = |F = ]] ([[User talk:F = |talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/F = |contribs]]) 10:19, 26 April 2012
Just as a point of consistency, I've noticed that the title of this article seems to be inconsistent with the title for neutron magnetic moment, proton magnetic moment. I don't think I know enough about the nuances to have a strong opinion as to whether anything should be changed, but it seems inconsistent. Should this article be retitled "Electron magnetic moment"? Or the other articles changed (which I'd oppose...)? Presumably the issue is just one of short hand/common usage, with "magnetic dipole moment" being formally correct, but shortened over time to just "magnetic moment". (Which likely risks possible confusion with quadrupole moments at some point.) Bdushaw (talk) 05:12, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 11:47, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Electron magnetic dipole moment → Electron magnetic moment – (1) The term "electron magnetic moment" is the more common term compared to "electron magnetic dipole moment" even for when the dipole moment is meant (per both a Google search and a Google books search); (2) This article is the natural place to include magnetic moments of all orders, even though the dipole moment is the only one usually considered (one would not create separate articles for the other electron magnetic moments). —Quondum 02:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Reading this section, I am puzzled. I sort of get what the discussion is getting at, but not really. The section suggests that the g-factor arises from a difference between mass and charge radii of the electron - a bit more background about that notion is required... Is this notion even meaningful? Is it misleading to the reader that this explanation is the origin of the g-factor? How does the equation with the ratio to the eighth power come about? Where does that come from? The result is that the mass and charge radii differ by about 9%...so what? Seems like numerology... It is all unsourced, and a brief google search turned up nothing on this sort of discussion. I'd suggest removing this section unless things can be explained better and sources for it found. Bdushaw (talk) 06:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
There are two unspecified notations in this section of the article: N_e and N_m in
and
Which is signficance of these quantities? (From where do these 2 formulae derive?)--5.2.200.163 (talk) 13:14, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Electron spin can be derived directly from the pair-production energy equation,
Eν = E- + E+
Where Eν is the minimum energy of a photon when pair product occurs, E- is the mass energy of the newly created electron, and E+ is the mass energy of the newly created positron. Here, for the moment ignore any residual kinetic energy while further noting the following: for a photon, Eν = hν0, where h is Planck’s constant and ν0 is the minimum frequency of the photon that creates the particle pair, and given that h = 2πħ, where ħ is Planck’s constant divided by 2π, and that 2πν0 = ω0, where ω0 is the angular frequency equivalent of the ν0,
hν0 = E- + E+ ⇒ 2πν0ħ = E- + E+ ⇒ ħω0 = E- + E+ ⇒ ħ = E-/ω0 + E+/ω0
Since the masses of electrons and positrons appear to be equal we can say that,
½ħ = E-/ω0 = E+/ω0 eq.1
The left side of the equation is electron spin. The other side tells that for the electron (or positron) the spin is equal to the mass energy divided by the angular frequency equivalent of the photon that created the particle(s). Angular frequency implies rotational motion so the electron is energy trapped in a spherical rotation. -- 7/24/2017
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Electron magnetic moment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Please don't revert edits without contentual explanation. 11:37, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
E.g. in the section "Spin magnetic dipole moment", the non-image math renderer displays a ħ in a fraction (S = ħ⁄2) as h – on my KDE setup, in any case. Unless I'm a total exception, I would say this is suboptimal. --2A02:8071:195:2C00:0:0:0:4AF5 (talk) 22:50, 16 February 2021 (UTC)