Does the spin of a nucleus have kinetic energy?

[Vmedvil]

Oh, so it goes toward the rest mass term I was wrong about this which also makes sense for quarks. If that is the case, then nuclei do not have angular momentum or angular kinetic energy in the form I was thinking about. The Rest momentum and Rest Energy is stored as Rest mass.

Then here are your Energy Terms for it.

8 hours ago, StringJunky said:

How can they be when they are scalar and vector respectively? Punch a screen in a straight path there is no change in momentum or KE but punch the screen with a constant speed in a curved path, the KE stays the same but the momentum changes because of the change in direction.

To you let say my Fist has a mass of 1 kilogram, and I move it with a velocity of 5 m/s one of my weak punches it will indeed have both. as  MV = p  and V²M(1/2) = KE , 

(p = 5 kg*m/s , KE =  12.5 Joules)  which are two versions of saying the physical value of the velocity in stopping ability needed to counter it.

Edited December 26, 2017 by Vmedvil

[Giorgio T.]

Ok the term spin used in quantum mechanics does not describe any rotation or angular momentum of the nucleus.

The nucleus does however have mass. Do we know if it is spinning? (in the traditional Newtonian world)

[Vmedvil]

15 minutes ago, Giorgio T. said:

Ok the term spin used in quantum mechanics does not describe any rotation or angular momentum of the nucleus.

The nucleus does however have mass. Do we know if it is spinning? (in the traditional Newtonian world)

The Spin number describes something about the particle its symmetry how far you would have to turn it to see the same view. So, No it is not spinning it is about symmetry of the Rest mass or Rest Energy.

[geordief]

16 minutes ago, Giorgio T. said:

Ok the term spin used in quantum mechanics does not describe any rotation or angular momentum of the nucleus.

The nucleus does however have mass. Do we know if it is spinning? (in the traditional Newtonian world)

Why is the term "spin" used at all  in QM if it causes confusion with classical terminology? Are there any other appellations of the phenomenon?

[Vmedvil]

Ya,  I had remembered that after Mordred said the word Rest mass, it is about Group Theory

Look at the spins, it is the superposition number, The "Spin Number"

http://universe-review.ca/R15-10-groups01.htm

Which I feel retarded now the "Spinor Number" is a better term for it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigenspinor

https://physics.weber.edu/schroeder/modern/SpinHandout.pdf

https://www.iop.vast.ac.vn/theor/lectures/seidel/qm/QM-Lectures2-2.pdf

Edited December 26, 2017 by Vmedvil

[swansont]

56 minutes ago, Giorgio T. said:

Ok the term spin used in quantum mechanics does not describe any rotation or angular momentum of the nucleus.

The nucleus does however have mass. Do we know if it is spinning? (in the traditional Newtonian world)

The spin represents all of the angular momentum in the ground state. It is not physically spinning.

38 minutes ago, geordief said:

Why is the term "spin" used at all  in QM if it causes confusion with classical terminology? 

It is angular momentum. It does not cause confusion among people who have studied physics to this point, or at least no more confusion than any other physics they are learning. 

[Giorgio T.]

10 minutes ago, swansont said:

The spin represents all of the angular momentum in the ground state. It is not physically spinning.

It is angular momentum. It does not cause confusion among people who have studied physics to this point, or at least no more confusion than any other physics they are learning. 

So the 'spin' represents the rest state angular momentum which is zero?

[swansont]

1 minute ago, Giorgio T. said:

So the 'spin' represents the rest state angular momentum which is zero?

Yes, it is the ground state angular momentum, but in most nuclei it is not zero.

[geordief]

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

Yes, it is the ground state angular momentum, but in most nuclei it is not zero.

Does that also answer Giorgio's question regarding the nucleus in this post?

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/111984-does-the-spin-of-a-nucleus-have-kinetic-energy/?do=findComment&comment=1030511

 

The nucleus does spin classically?

 

[Vmedvil]

35 minutes ago, geordief said:

Does that also answer Giorgio's question regarding the nucleus in this post?

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/111984-does-the-spin-of-a-nucleus-have-kinetic-energy/?do=findComment&comment=1030511

 

The nucleus does spin classically?

 

I want to say yes because classically to have magnetism you need to have current, which is I = Q/dt

Edited December 26, 2017 by Vmedvil

[geordief]

3 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

I want to say yes because classically to have magnetism you need to have current, which is I = Q/dt

At what level does the magnetic "charge" originate ? " Inside" the electron?

[Vmedvil]

3 minutes ago, geordief said:

At what level does the magnetic "charge" originate ? " Inside" the electron?

Fermions or possibly String level being a Planck Length

Edited December 26, 2017 by Vmedvil

[geordief]

6 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

Quarks or possibly String level being a Planck Length

So the electron  can be seen as a bearer of charge rather than originator (if that makes sense)

[Vmedvil]

Just now, geordief said:

So the electron  can be seen as a bearer of charge rather than originator (if that makes sense)

Yes, it is just bearing a charge dimension, here is the Kaku Equation for String Charge in a String Field.

https://studygtu.blogspot.com/2016/02/what-is-meaning-of-michio-kakus-equation.html

[swansont]

1 hour ago, geordief said:

Does that also answer Giorgio's question regarding the nucleus in this post?

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/111984-does-the-spin-of-a-nucleus-have-kinetic-energy/?do=findComment&comment=1030511

That's been answered a half-dozen times. No. There is no KE associated with spin.

Quote

The nucleus does spin classically?

Can it? Sure. Stand up, turn around. All the nuclei in you body have undergone a classical rotation .

But it is not due to QM spin.

1 hour ago, Vmedvil said:

I want to say yes because classically to have magnetism you need to have current, which is I = Q/dt

Electrons, protons and neutrons each have a magnetic moment, without having classical, physical rotation.

[Vmedvil]

4 minutes ago, swansont said:

Can it? Sure. Stand up, turn around. All the nuclei in you body have undergone a classical rotation .

But it is not due to QM spin.

Electrons, protons and neutrons each have a magnetic moment, without having classical, physical rotation.

The Vibration of them then?

[swansont]

Just now, Vmedvil said:

The Vibration of them then?

We're talking about rotation, not vibration.

[Vmedvil]

Just now, swansont said:

We're talking about rotation, not vibration.

Well, there is another solution to 1/dt  which is f 

[swansont]

1 hour ago, geordief said:

At what level does the magnetic "charge" originate ? " Inside" the electron?

There is no "inside" an electron.

[Vmedvil]

1 minute ago, swansont said:

There is no "inside" an electron.

I get that

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/206276/why-are-electron-wavefunctions-standing-waves

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/Schr2.html

[swansont]

14 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

I get that

I wasn't responding to you 

[Vmedvil]

Just now, swansont said:

I wasn't responding to you 

Sorry, Swan I didn't see that, my bad, I answered anyways.

[swansont]

18 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

Well, there is another solution to 1/dt  which is f 

That doesn't make this relevant. 

[Vmedvil]

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

That doesn't make this relevant. 

It kinda does because

http://hydrogen.physik.uni-wuppertal.de/hyperphysics/hyperphysics/hbase/rotq.html

[swansont]

2 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

It kinda does because

http://hydrogen.physik.uni-wuppertal.de/hyperphysics/hyperphysics/hbase/rotq.html

That's not a vibration