Talk:Fine structure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Physics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-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.
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Physics because it uses a stub template.
  • If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{Physics}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page.
  • If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{Physics}} template, removing {{Physics}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

Moved from the article:

To add:

  • Spin-orbit hamiltonian and effect on levels (choice of eigenstates for perturbation calculation)
  • Relativistic kinetic energy correction
  • Unusual hydrogenic atoms eg Muonium
  • Fine structure in many-electron atoms

--Smack (talk) 01:14, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] origin of the term

Could anyone add something about the origin of the term?

[edit] Spin Orbit

Added detail. Removed section on spin of bosons and fermions as it seemed fairly irrelevant? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.192.82.128 (talk) 14:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Variables

It would be nice to have something explaining what the variables are, for a layman such as myself it is impossible to understand what the equations mean without that. 82.216.248.178 08:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spin-orbit coupling

The article currently reads:

The spin-orbit correction arises when we shift from the standard frame of reference (where the electron orbits the nucleus) into one where the electron is stationary and the nucleus instead orbits it.

This doesn't seem precise as it could be — the spin-orbit interaction is always there. (Clearly we can't have an physical phenomenon that depends on our reference frame!) It's just that it becomes much easier to model when we consider the electron as our reference point — then we can just consider a moving nucleus. Maybe this should be reworded? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.124.128 (talk) 06:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)