Question

Which of the following is a possible set of quantum numbers for an electron n, l, m subscript l, m subscript ?

(1, 0, 0, +1)
(2, 2, 1, +½)
(4, -3, 0, -½)
(3, 2, 1, -½)

Answer 1

@Abhisar is this like the first problem we did?

Answer 2

What is n, l, m subscript l, m subscript ?

Answer 3

is it n, l, \(\huge\text{m}\)\(\huge_l\), \(\huge\text{m}_s\) ?

Answer 4

if yes then yes it's like the first question

Answer 5

Let's see if (2, 2, 1, +½) is possible or not

Answer 6

For n=2, l is 0 to (n-1)
l = 0,1 (l can never be equal to n)

Answer 7

So the option is incorrect !

Answer 8

Check the first option

Answer 9

ok

Answer 10

yes it works
0 to (1-1)
0=0

Answer 11

Hint: \(\huge\text{m}_s\) has only two values +1/2 and -1/2

Answer 12

yes it works for l but does it works for \(\huge\text{m}_s\) too ?
check it !

Answer 13

u will have to check each quantum number in a given option

Answer 14

Lets see one more example
(4, -3, 0, -½)

Answer 15

do with me

Answer 16

ok

Answer 17

Lets first check l

Answer 18

n=4, so l = ?

Answer 19

0 to (4-1)
0 to 3
i.e 1,2,3

Answer 20

yes i.e 0,1,2,3 ryt ?

Answer 21

oh yes

Answer 22

now check if the option says the same ?

Answer 23

no

Answer 24

very good !

Answer 25

it says -3, so the option is wrong

Answer 26

ok ?

Answer 27

ok

Answer 28

Now Lets check
(1, 0, 0, +1)

Answer 29

n=1, so l= ?

Answer 30

they all work

Answer 31

wait, first tell me l=?

Answer 32

0 to (n-1)
0 to (1-1)
0=0

0 to (1-1)
0=0

and what is the difference between 1 and +1

Answer 33

no difference between +1 and 1, both are same but -1 & 1 or -1 & +1 are different

Answer 34

ohkay so l will have only one value this time and that is 0

Answer 35

yes

Answer 36

even the option says 0, so it is correct upto l. Now lets move to \(\huge\text{m}_l\) in the same option

Answer 37

wait so are you saying that the first option is incorrect?

Answer 38

no i am just saying that it is correct upto l. To say that it is completely correct we will have to check the rest two quantum numbers too

Answer 39

getting it ?

Answer 40

oh yea ok

Answer 41

so are we doing the second option now?

Answer 42

no u have to check the rest quantum numbers in the first option. Check if \(\huge m_s\) is correct or not

Answer 43

oh ok

Answer 44

\(\huge m_s\) = -l to +l

Answer 45

we got l=0 ryt ?

Answer 46

yes

Answer 47

so that can't be right

Answer 48

so \(\huge m_s\) will be -0,0 &+0 or simply say only 0

Answer 49

getting it ?

Answer 50

ooo yes

Answer 51

Option A also says that \(\huge m_s\) = 0, so we know now that 3 out of four quantum numbers are correct, lets check the final one

Answer 52

alright

Answer 53

oh man !
Sorry \(\huge m_s\) will be \(\huge m_l\) in my last 4 replies. i typed it wrong. Please correct it

Answer 54

yea I was thinking that

Answer 55

now lets check the fourth one which is \(\huge m_s\)

Answer 56

\(\huge m_s\) has only 2 values (always), either +1/2 or -1/2. check what is given in option A

Answer 57

0 to (1/2)-1)
0 to 1-(1/2)
0 to 1/2

Answer 58

what r u doin ?
Just check the 4th quantum number in option A

Answer 59

Simply see if it is one among +1/2 or -1/2 or not

Answer 60

Huh? like this.
0 to (1-1)
0=0

Answer 61

u r not getting the pont....each quantum number has its own way of calculation. Formula for calculating every quantum number is different. There are four different ways to calculate the four different quantum numbers

Answer 62

ooo

Answer 63

(1, 0, 0, +1), this means 4 different quantum numbers

Answer 64

It is among 1/2 but not -1/2

Answer 65

u have quantum numbers given in ur textbook ?

Answer 66

huh?

Answer 67

read it !
I will see u tmrw !
it's 2:20 AM here

Answer 68

oh ok thanks thanks! what country are u in?

Answer 69

@Abhisar

Answer 70

http://openstudy.com/users/abhisar

Answer 71

India!