Skip to main content

Physics IV course sequence · Interactive lesson

Adding angular momenta and Clebsch-Gordan coefficients

Fine structure, the helium spectrum, every term symbol you will ever assign: each begins by asking what totals two coupled angular momenta can form. This topic hands you the allowed j values, the audit proving none are missing, and the coefficients that translate between the two honest ways of labelling the same states.

UPIV-09.08 · Lesson 8 of 9 in this unit. Position is not a completion score.
Starting model: Adding angular momenta and Clebsch-Gordan coefficientsNumber of product states |m₁, m₂⟩ sharing each total m = m₁ + m₂, for j₁ = 2.0 and j₂ = 1.0. The count is 1 at the stretched edges m = ±3.0, climbs by one per unit step inward — each rise opening one new multiplet — and plateaus at 3 between the kinks at m = ±1.0. Total states: 15 = (2j₁+1)(2j₂+1).product states per total mplateau = multiplets = 3edges ±3.0, kinks ±1.0total m
Start with a picture. Change the model in the lab below.
1

Build the model

Two momenta, one total: which j survive, and in what mixture of the products.

The key idea

Coupling angular momenta j₁ and j₂ yields total quantum numbers j from |j₁ − j₂| up to j₁ + j₂ in integer steps, and the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients are the overlaps that expand each coupled state |j, m⟩ in the product states |j₁ m₁⟩|j₂ m₂⟩.

Example. Two spin-½ electrons couple to s = 1 or s = 0 only — 3 + 1 = 4 = 2 × 2 states — and the m = 0 triplet is (↑↓ + ↓↑)/√2: two Clebsch-Gordan coefficients of 1/√2 ≈ 0.707.

The complete physical model and assumptions

Add two angular momentum operators, Ĵ = Ĵ₁ + Ĵ₂, and the sum obeys the same commutation relations as any angular momentum — so its eigenvalues must be j(j+1)ħ² and mħ with no new derivation needed. The only open question is which j survive, and ladder bookkeeping answers it: j runs from |j₁ − j₂| to j₁ + j₂ in integer steps, and the count Σ(2j+1) = (2j₁+1)(2j₂+1) confirms the coupled multiplets exactly exhaust the product states. The subtlety is that this is a change of basis, not a relabelling. Ĵz = Ĵ₁z + Ĵ₂z, so m = m₁ + m₂ holds exactly; but Ĵ² contains the cross term 2Ĵ₁⋅Ĵ₂, which fails to commute with Ĵ₁z and Ĵ₂z separately — so a state of definite total j is in general a superposition of several products, and a product like ↑↓ has no definite total j at all. The Clebsch-Gordan coefficients are the entries of the unitary matrix connecting the two bases, and they cost nothing beyond ladder algebra: write the unique stretched state |j₁+j₂, j₁+j₂⟩, lower it with Ĵ₋ = Ĵ₁₋ + Ĵ₂₋, and take an orthogonal combination whenever a new multiplet opens. The price of coupling is definiteness of the parts — in a coupled state m₁ and m₂ are in general individually uncertain — which is exactly the trade an internal Ĵ₁⋅Ĵ₂ interaction forces you to make.

1Two complete label sets, one space

Four commuting operators label the product states: Ĵ₁², Ĵ₂², Ĵ₁z, Ĵ₂z give the uncoupled basis |j₁ m₁⟩|j₂ m₂⟩, and for fixed j₁ and j₂ there are (2j₁+1)(2j₂+1) of them. The total Ĵ = Ĵ₁ + Ĵ₂ obeys the standard angular-momentum commutators, because the two act on different degrees of freedom and every component of Ĵ₁ commutes with every component of Ĵ₂, so its own labels j and m are also available — but Ĵ² = Ĵ₁² + Ĵ₂² + 2Ĵ₁⋅Ĵ₂, and the cross term contains Ĵ₁₊Ĵ₂₋ + Ĵ₁₋Ĵ₂₊, which shuffles m₁ against m₂. So Ĵ² commutes with Ĵ₁² and Ĵ₂² but not with Ĵ₁z or Ĵ₂z separately, and you must choose a set: (Ĵ₁², Ĵ₂², Ĵ₁z, Ĵ₂z) or (Ĵ₁², Ĵ₂², Ĵ², Ĵz). Which one is good is decided by the Hamiltonian. An internal coupling proportional to Ĵ₁⋅Ĵ₂ — spin-orbit, spin-spin, hyperfine — is diagonal in the coupled basis; a strong external field that grips each moment separately prefers the uncoupled one. That competition is exactly the weak-field versus Paschen-Back divide of the next topic.

2The triangle rule comes from counting projections

The largest possible m is j₁ + j₂, and only one product reaches it: m₁ = j₁ with m₂ = j₂. One state means one multiplet passes through it, so jₘₐₓ = j₁ + j₂ and j never exceeds the sum. Step down to m = j₁ + j₂ − 1 and two products qualify; the jₘₐₓ ladder claims one combination, and the single leftover must start a new multiplet with j = j₁ + j₂ − 1. Each unit step inward adds one more product and opens one more ladder, until the smaller momentum runs out of projections at m = |j₁ − j₂|; below that the count is flat and nothing new opens. Hence j runs from |j₁ − j₂| to j₁ + j₂ in integer steps — 2 min(j₁, j₂) + 1 multiplets, never a half step between neighbours even when the j values are half-integers. The audit confirms it: for j₁ = 2, j₂ = 3/2 the totals are j = 7/2, 5/2, 3/2, 1/2 with 8 + 6 + 4 + 2 = 20 states, exactly the 5 × 4 products you started with. The name is the classical limit showing through: two classical vectors of lengths J₁ and J₂ add to any magnitude between |J₁ − J₂| and J₁ + J₂, and for large j₁ and j₂ the allowed totals, spaced by ħ, fill that same range almost continuously.

3m adds exactly; j does not add at all

Ĵz = Ĵ₁z + Ĵ₂z is an operator identity, so m = m₁ + m₂ holds for every state with no exception — any Clebsch-Gordan coefficient violating it vanishes, which is why the tables are organised by total m. Nothing similar holds for j, because the magnitudes are not arrows of length jħ. Two electron spins each have |S| = (√3/2)ħ ≈ 0.87ħ; laid parallel as arrows they would reach 1.73ħ, yet the allowed totals are √2 ħ ≈ 1.41ħ for s = 1 and exactly 0 for s = 0 — neither is the arrow sum. The honest statement is weaker and stranger: a product state of definite m₁ and m₂ generally has no definite j at all. ↑↓ has m = 0 but is an equal superposition of s = 1 and s = 0. The only products that are simultaneously coupled states are the two stretched ones at m = ±(j₁ + j₂), the ends of the m range, where a single product has nothing to mix with.

4Generate the table: top rung, lower, orthogonalise

Every Clebsch-Gordan table is built with one tool. Start at the unique top: for two spin-½ particles, |1, 1⟩ = ↑↑, forced because no other product has m = 1. Apply Ĵ₋ = Ŝ₁₋ + Ŝ₂₋. The left side gives ħ√(1⋅2 − 1⋅0) = √2 ħ times |1, 0⟩; on the right each one-particle lowering carries the factor ħ√(¾ + ¼) = ħ, producing ħ(↓↑ + ↑↓). Dividing through, |1, 0⟩ = (↑↓ + ↓↑)/√2 — both coefficients 1/√2, and no integral was ever computed. The m = 0 subspace is two-dimensional, so one combination is left over; orthogonality forces |0, 0⟩ = (↑↓ − ↓↑)/√2, with the overall sign fixed by the Condon–Shortley convention that the coefficient of the highest m₁ is positive. One more lowering gives |1, −1⟩ = ↓↓, completing the 4 × 4 unitary matrix. Larger tables need nothing new: lower until each ladder ends, orthogonalise whenever a new multiplet opens, and the phase convention keeps every entry real.

5The case atoms use daily: l ⊗ ½

An electron in an orbital of quantum number l couples its orbit to its spin, giving j = l + ½ or l − ½ — two fine-structure levels — with j = ½ alone when l = 0, which is why s terms show no doublet. The general coefficients are worth knowing: |l+½, m⟩ = √((l+m+½)/(2l+1)) |mₗ = m−½⟩↑ + √((l−m+½)/(2l+1)) |mₗ = m+½⟩↓, and the orthogonal combination builds j = l−½. For a p electron, l = 1: |3/2, ½⟩ = √(2/3)|mₗ = 0⟩↑ + √(1/3)|mₗ = 1⟩↓. Read the structure off the square roots: at the stretched rungs m = ±(l+½) one of them vanishes and the state is a single product, while mid-ladder the blend is strongest. The dimension audit holds as always: 2(2l+1) = (2l+2) + 2l, so for l = 1 the six products regroup into four j = 3/2 states and two j = 1/2 states.

6What the coefficients buy, and what coupling costs

Each squared coefficient is a measurement probability. In the triplet |1, 0⟩ the amplitude on ↑↓ is 1/√2, so measuring S₁z returns +ħ/2 exactly half the time: coupling to definite total spin has made the individual projections maximally uncertain. That is the cost. The payoff is that in the coupled basis Ĵ₁⋅Ĵ₂ = (Ĵ² − Ĵ₁² − Ĵ₂²)/2 collapses to a number. For l ⊗ ½ it equals +lħ²/2 when j = l+½ and −(l+1)ħ²/2 when j = l−½; a p electron gives +ħ²/2 and −ħ², so a spin-orbit Hamiltonian ξ L̂⋅Ŝ splits the level into a doublet of separation ξ(2l+1)ħ²/2 — for l = 1, precisely 3ξħ²/2. No wavefunction integral was needed: the angular content of fine structure is pure coupling algebra, and the radial physics enters only through ξ. That is the hand-off to the next topic, where term symbols, the interval rule, and the Landé g factor all consume j, l and s through exactly this machinery.

2

Key equations

Read the units, assumptions and limits before substituting.

Triangle rule

j = |j₁−j₂|, |j₁−j₂|+1, …, j₁+j₂

Names every multiplet before any coefficient is computed — the steps are integers even when the j values themselves are half-integers.

j₁, j₂, j are dimensionless quantum numbers; the momentum magnitudes are √(j(j+1)) ħ, with ħ in J s

State-count audit

Σ (2j+1) = (2j₁+1)(2j₂+1)

The audit that the coupled multiplets exactly exhaust the products: j₁ = 2, j₂ = 3/2 gives 2+4+6+8 = 20 = 5 × 4.

sum over j from |j₁−j₂| to j₁+j₂; both sides count basis states, so both are pure numbers

Projection rule

⟨j₁ m₁ j₂ m₂|j m⟩ = 0 unless m = m₁ + m₂

Kills most coefficients on sight and organises every Clebsch-Gordan table into blocks of constant total m.

follows from Ĵz = Ĵ₁z + Ĵ₂z; each m is a z-projection in units of ħ

Clebsch-Gordan expansion

|j, m⟩ = Σ ⟨j₁ m₁ j₂ m₂|j m⟩ |j₁ m₁⟩|j₂ m₂⟩

The unitary dictionary between the bases — each squared coefficient is the probability of finding that product.

sum over m₁ + m₂ = m; coefficients real and dimensionless in the Condon–Shortley convention

Lowering step

Ĵ₋|j, m⟩ = ħ√(j(j+1) − m(m−1)) |j, m−1⟩

Applied repeatedly from the stretched state |j₁+j₂, j₁+j₂⟩, and paired with orthogonality whenever a new multiplet opens, this relation generates every table entry.

Ĵ₋ = Ĵ₁₋ + Ĵ₂₋ acts on both parts at once; the factor carries the ħ

The two workhorse cases

½ ⊗ ½ = 1 ⊕ 0 · l ⊗ ½ = (l+½) ⊕ (l−½)

Singlet and triplet for two spins; j = l ± ½ for one electron's orbit and spin — the input to every term symbol.

dimension checks: 4 = 3 + 1 and 2(2l+1) = (2l+2) + 2l; j = ½ alone when l = 0
3

Interactive lab

Predict first. Explore the model. Compare the result.

Explore the model

2.0
0.5 to 4; steps of 0.5.
1.0
0.5 to 4; steps of 0.5.

Try this. Set j₁ = j₂ = 2: the kinks meet at m = 0, so jₘᵢₙ = 0 and five multiplets open. Slide j₂ to ½ and the plateau drops to 2 — only j = j₁ ± ½ survive, the l ⊗ ½ split every atomic term uses. The corners always sit at count 1: a stretched top rung is a single product, never a mixture.

Live results

j MAX = j₁ + j₂
3.0
j MIN = |j₁ − j₂|
1.0
MULTIPLETS
3
TOTAL STATES
15

Results follow this lesson’s model and assumptions. Displayed values are rounded.

Interactive Physics IV modelNumber of product states |m₁, m₂⟩ sharing each total m = m₁ + m₂, for j₁ = 2.0 and j₂ = 1.0. The count is 1 at the stretched edges m = ±3.0, climbs by one per unit step inward — each rise opening one new multiplet — and plateaus at 3 between the kinks at m = ±1.0. Total states: 15 = (2j₁+1)(2j₂+1).product states per total mplateau = multiplets = 3edges ±3.0, kinks ±1.0total m
Number of product states |m₁, m₂⟩ sharing each total m = m₁ + m₂, for j₁ = 2.0 and j₂ = 1.0. The count is 1 at the stretched edges m = ±3.0, climbs by one per unit step inward — each rise opening one new multiplet — and plateaus at 3 between the kinks at m = ±1.0. Total states: 15 = (2j₁+1)(2j₂+1).

Predict → change one variable → check

Plan a change before running it. Every other input stays at the saved baseline.

Saved baseline. Angular momentum j₁: 2.0; Angular momentum j₂: 1.0

Baseline 2.0; choose 0.5 to 4, in steps of 0.5.
4. Compared with the saved baseline, this result will…

This experiment is kept only while this page is open. It does not change saved course progress.

4

Catch the common trap

The persistent error is treating j like m — as something that simply adds. It appears in two forms. First, "two spin-½ particles make spin 1": sometimes, but s = 0 is equally available; j₁ + j₂ is only the top of a range descending in integer steps to |j₁ − j₂|. Second, and more damaging, "opposite arrows mean zero total spin": the product ↑↓ is not the singlet but the equal superposition (|1,0⟩ + |0,0⟩)/√2, and measuring S² on it returns 2ħ² half the time. Both fail for the same operator reason: Ĵz is the sum of the parts, so m adds exactly, but Ĵ² carries the cross term 2Ĵ₁⋅Ĵ₂, which does not commute with Ĵ₁z and Ĵ₂z — so states with definite individual projections cannot in general have a definite total magnitude. Only the two stretched states, m = ±(j₁ + j₂), belong to both bases at once.

5

Practice & worked examples

3 authored examples. Make an attempt, then reveal the reasoning one step at a time.

EasyExample 1

A particle with j₁ = 3/2 couples to a second with j₂ = 1. List every allowed total j, and verify that the coupled states exactly account for the product states.

Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.

0 of 4 steps revealed.

MediumExample 2

For two spin-½ particles, construct |1, 0⟩ by lowering from |1, 1⟩ = ↑↑, find the singlet |0, 0⟩, and give the probability that a measurement of S₁z in the state |1, 0⟩ returns +ħ/2.

Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.

0 of 5 steps revealed.

HardExample 3

A 2p electron has l = 1 and s = ½. Construct |j = 3/2, mⱼ = ½⟩ by lowering from the stretched state, write its orthogonal partner |j = ½, mⱼ = ½⟩, give the mₗ probabilities in the j = 3/2 state, and evaluate L⋅S for both j values.

Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.

0 of 5 steps revealed.

6

Quick check

Select an answer and explain it before checking.

Two electrons are prepared in the product state ↑↓ — the first definitely spin up along z, the second definitely down. What values can a measurement of the total S² return, and with what probabilities?
7

Review & continue

Coupling angular momenta j₁ and j₂ yields total quantum numbers j from |j₁ − j₂| up to j₁ + j₂ in integer steps, and the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients are the overlaps that expand each coupled state |j, m⟩ in the product states |j₁ m₁⟩|j₂ m₂⟩.

  • Explain the relationship without looking at the equation.
  • Check a sign, a unit and a model assumption in your working.
  • Return to the lab or worked example if a step is still unclear.

Extra challenging questions

Connect several ideas, explore supplied data, and compare your reasoning with a worked solution.