Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
freem
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Openai/6897769e-4ee4-800f-aba5-69cca34f701c
(section)
Add languages
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== What I’ve just given is a coherent heuristic (two complementary ways) but not a full proof. To make it rigorous would require one of two next technical steps (I’ll happily do either): ==== # Lagrangian/wave derivation (recommended path): - Write a microscopic field/wavefunction living on the spherical boundary (2-D manifold). Include a boundary action term with the boundary radius rrr and an explicit reff=r/2r_{\rm eff}=r/2reff=r/2 factor that modifies the kinetic/phase term. - Derive stationary-phase (path integral) condition or Schrödinger equation on the boundary and enforce single-valuedness. Show eigenvalues of angular momentum operator are half-integers because the fundamental domain of the boundary wavefunction is the half-circle. - This yields a proper operator derivation of L=sℏL = s\hbarL=sℏ with s∈Z+12s\in\mathbb{Z}+\tfrac12s∈Z+21. (This is the cleanest route; it’s a short calculation if we adopt a simple boundary action.) # Detailed topological / spinor mapping: - Construct the boundary manifold and show its holonomy / spin structure is nontrivial (i.e., the boundary has spin structure with a sign change on 2π rotation). Demonstrate that the spin bundle over that boundary is a nontrivial double cover. Conclude allowed representations are spinors (half-integer). (This needs a bit of differential geometry language.) Caveats you should state publicly (so people don’t accuse QAT of loose claims) * Classical radius manipulation alone does not create spin in orthodox QFT — spin is fundamentally a representation property of the Lorentz/SU(2) group. The above argument is a geometric mechanism for how the boundary domain and phase accumulation could force spinor-type boundary conditions that yield half-integer eigenvalues. It must be backed by an explicit boundary action/wave derivation to be convincing. * The semiclassical Bohr–Sommerfeld step is an approximation. The rigorous Lagrangian path (above) will convert these heuristics into operator statements.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to freem are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (see
Freem:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)