0

In this statement from Modern Quantum Mechanics by J.J. Sakurai:

If $j$ is an integer, all $m$ values are integers; if $j$ is a half-integer, all $m$ values are half-integers. The allowed $m$-values for a given $j$ are $$m = \underbrace{-j,-j+1,\ldots,j-1,j}_{2j+1 {~\rm{states}}}$$

It says that $m$ will have a total of $2j+1$ states. I do not see this, however. Perhaps it is obvious, but could someone explain or show me why if $m$ goes from $-j,\ldots,j$ it will give $2j+1$ number of states?

Qmechanic
  • 201,751
Guest
  • 375

1 Answers1

5

The $2j$ is from the positive and negative j values, and the additional $+1$ accounts for $j=0$.

doublefelix
  • 6,872
  • 1
  • 23
  • 52
kbh
  • 447
  • 4
  • 11
  • 1
    It is not correct for half integers, which has no $m=0$ – unsym Dec 27 '14 at 05:33
  • 1
    @hwlau the reasoning doesn't work for half-integers but the expression $2j+1$ is still valid. – David Z Dec 27 '14 at 06:36
  • True. I was trying to be instructive by considering the simple case, but my terseness could have been more precise I suppose. – kbh Dec 27 '14 at 06:49
  • @DavidZ Is it just coincidence that $\frac{d}{dj}(j(j+1)) = 2j+1$. I mean is there any connection between $2j+1$ and the eigenvalue of $J^2$ – Hubble07 Dec 27 '14 at 09:11