For constraint in $\phi$, $\psi(\phi+2\pi$)= $\psi(\phi$) seems logical as after 2$\pi$ rotation we go back to the same point, therefore functions should be same. But how does it hold for $\theta$ as rotation of $\pi$ gives diametrically opposite point on the sphere, why should then $\psi(\theta+\pi$) be equal to $\psi(\theta$)?
-
$\begingroup$ Isn't it the same? If you add $2\pi$ to $\theta$, the value of the function is the same. Usually, this value goes from $-\pi$ to $\pi$, but the invariant still holds. $\endgroup$– ZheCommented Feb 18, 2017 at 18:23
-
1$\begingroup$ but we are adding $\pi$ to theta $\endgroup$– BEWARBCommented Feb 18, 2017 at 18:27
-
2$\begingroup$ $\theta$ ranges from $0$ to $\pi$, as far as I know. It's complicated by the fact that chemists usually use $\theta$ and $\phi$ a different way from the physicists, but I think OP is referring to $\theta$ as the angle made with the $z$-axis. $\endgroup$– orthocresolCommented Feb 18, 2017 at 20:25
-
1$\begingroup$ If $\theta$ is the polar angle measured as it were down from the north pole it ranges from $0..\pi$ and $\phi$ the azimuthal angle, (longitude round the equator) from $0..2\pi$. $\endgroup$– porphyrinCommented Feb 19, 2017 at 14:33
-
2$\begingroup$ There is no a priori restriction between the values of $\psi(\theta)$ and $\psi(\theta + \pi)$. Solutions of the particle-on-a-sphere problem are labeled by two indices $l$ and $m$, and solutions with even/odd $l$ satisfy $\psi(\theta) = \pm \psi(\theta + \pi)$ $\endgroup$– higgsssCommented Feb 19, 2017 at 14:52
1 Answer
First of all, as orthocresol and porphyrin said, we should keep in mind that $\phi$ and $\theta$ must span different sets, and there are different conventions on them:
Any spherical coordinate triplet (r, θ, φ) specifies a single point of three-dimensional space. On the other hand, every point has infinitely many equivalent spherical coordinates.
[...]
If it is necessary to define a unique set of spherical coordinates for each point, one must restrict their ranges. A common choice is:
$r$ ≥ 0
0° ≤ $\theta$ ≤ 180° ($\pi$ rad)
0° ≤ $\phi$ < 360° ($2 \pi$ rad)
(Source)
In other words (using the convention above), you must have both $\psi(r, \theta, \phi) = \psi(r, \theta, \phi + 2 \pi)$ and $\psi(r, \theta, \phi) = \psi(r, \theta + 2 \pi, \phi)$ for spherical periodicity. This is the basic symmetry on a sphere.
But the assignment $(r, \theta, \phi) \rightarrow (x, y, z)$ becomes "ambiguous" (not injective) if the function is defined as an application from $[0, \infty) \times [0, 2 \pi] \times [0, 2 \pi)$ to $\mathbb{R}^3$ and hence not invertible.
You can easily see this if you imagine mapping the surface of earth by having a very long rope with its ends fixed at both poles (half diameter, 180°) and an airplane carrying the middle of this rope around the globe (full diameter, 360° movement).
That being said, the mapping $(r, \theta, \phi) \rightarrow (x, y, z)$ must be taken from $[0, \infty) \times [0, \pi] \times [0, 2 \pi)$ to $\mathbb{R}^3$.
But that does not mean that $\psi(r, \theta, \phi) = \psi(r, \theta + \pi, \phi)$, and as higgsss observed, $\psi(r, \theta + \pi, \phi)$ is not necessarily equal to $\psi(r, \theta, \phi)$. But higgsss also observed that, for some problems, some solutions might have symmetries allowing $\psi(r, \theta, \phi) = \pm \psi(r, \theta + \pi, \phi)$.
Solutions for the hydrogen atom are good examples of this: for the minus sign, p atomic orbitals, and, for the plus sign, d atomic orbitals. You can see other orbital symmetries by looking at them here.
-
2$\begingroup$ You have it backwards. $\varphi\to\varphi+2\pi$ takes you to the same point on the sphere, so the value of $\psi$ must be the same. $\theta\to\theta+\pi$ takes you to a different point. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 6, 2017 at 21:30
-
$\begingroup$ You're right, I edited and corrected the mistake. Thanks! $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 7, 2017 at 15:42
-
1$\begingroup$ That's good, but now your answer is unrelated to the question, since the latter was about $\theta+\pi$. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 7, 2017 at 18:11
-
$\begingroup$ I think it is still related to the question, since it addresses the fact that $\psi(\theta + \pi)$ is not necessarily equal to $\psi(\theta)$, as was asked, but I will rephrase it to make it more explicit. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 8, 2017 at 15:01
-
1