Electron spin

@kazetnagorra said
I'm not sure how best to answer such a general question other than to suggest you look up what intrinsic spin is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(physics)

Why do you think scale makes a big difference?

@humy said
You IMPLIED the claim.

First you said in the question in your OP;

"Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck discovered not only that electrons were orthorotating, but also that they were spinning at 1.37 times the speed of light. "

Which implies you took this nonsense claim with some credence else you wouldn't bother mentioning it.

Then you asked the question in your OP;

"Do electr ...[text shortened]... estion because you wanted to learn or know but rather you were and still are just trolling as usual.

Your constantly saying "no" doesn't tell me what your positions is.
A few simple questions will solve that.

Do electrons spin?
Has the spin been measured?
If so, what was the speed of spin measured?

@metal-brain said


Do electrons spin?
Has the spin been measured?
If so, what was the speed of spin measured?

Apparently you don't read most of my posts. If you did, you would already know the answers. The answers, just like I implied to you here, are;

Yes, electrons have a property called spin.

And, NO, the 'speed' of that spin has NOT been measured because no such 'speed' exists. As I repeatedly told you, and you can verify this by just looking it up yourself, there is no speed of the electron spin because it isn't 'spin' in that sense.
Reminder of what I said;

"...there is no meaningful definable 'speed' of an electron's spin
...
The 'spin' is property of electrons we can measure by the way they interact with magnetic fields, but it doesn't have any more intuitive analogy to spinning objects we're familiar with.
..."

Exactly which part of the above do you not understand?

Therefore there is no "If so".

Next stupid question...

@metal-brain said
Why do you think scale makes a big difference?

It's not scale, it's number. A neutron star is a composite object, there are many particles present. With an electron there is only one particle.

@metal-brain said
Why do you think scale makes a big difference?

Well gee, that's what this whole quantum mechanics stuff is about, isn't it?

@deepthought said
It's not scale, it's number. A neutron star is a composite object, there are many particles present. With an electron there is only one particle.

What does scale have to do with it?

@humy said
Apparently you don't read most of my posts. If you did, you would already know the answers. The answers, just like I implied to you here, are;

Yes, electrons have a property called spin.

And, NO, the 'speed' of that spin has NOT been measured because no such 'speed' exists. As I repeatedly told you, and you can verify this by just looking it up yourself, there is no speed ...[text shortened]... art of the above do you not understand?

Therefore there is no "If so".

Next stupid question...

"there is no speed of the electron spin because it isn't 'spin' in that sense."

So spin is not spin? LOL!

@Metal-Brain
Just think of it as a coating of cotton candy around the nucleus.

https://education.jlab.org/qa/electron_01.html

They say electrons 'spin' around atoms (single protons in a hydrogen atom) at 1/327th speed of light, about 2200 kilometers per second. Not even close to relativistic speed. AFAIK there is no specific direction of the spin so attosecond by attosecond the direction can change on a dime so it could be going around an equator line but shift to a polar line and anything in-between making it impossible to peg exactly where the electron is from time A to time B. That is the CORE of the uncertainty principle.
That is because the velocity can be determined OR the position can be determined very accurately but not both at the same time therefore a direction and velocity cannot be pegged. One attosecond it could be going north and the next attosecond going south. No way of telling where it is exactly in the sphere of the area where the electron has some probability of being at any one time.

@metal-brain said
What does scale have to do with it?

'it' determines that one has speed of spin while the other doesn't.

@metal-brain said
What does scale have to do with it?

If quantum mechanics was just scaling down classical physics to small scales, we wouldn't need it.

@humy said
'it' determines that one has speed of spin while the other doesn't.

You just said electrons do not spin.

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
Just think of it as a coating of cotton candy around the nucleus.

https://education.jlab.org/qa/electron_01.html

They say electrons 'spin' around atoms (single protons in a hydrogen atom) at 1/327th speed of light, about 2200 kilometers per second. Not even close to relativistic speed. AFAIK there is no specific direction of the spin so attosecond by atto ...[text shortened]... exactly in the sphere of the area where the electron has some probability of being at any one time.

You are confusing spin with orbit.

@kazetnagorra said
If quantum mechanics was just scaling down classical physics to small scales, we wouldn't need it.

Are you saying electron do not spin?

@metal-brain said
Are you saying electron do not spin?

I'm saying intrinsic spin isn't the same as scaling down the notion of angular momentum from classically spinning objects.

In quantum mechanics, angular momentum (like other quantities) is expressed as an operator, and its one-dimensional projections have quantized eigenvalues. Angular momentum is subject to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, implying that at any time, only one projection (also called "component" ) can be measured with definite precision; the other two then remain uncertain. Because of this, it turns out that the notion of a quantum particle literally "spinning" about an axis does not exist. Nevertheless, elementary particles still possess a spin angular momentum, but this angular momentum does not correspond to spinning motion in the ordinary sense.[1]

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

@kazetnagorra said
I'm saying intrinsic spin isn't the same as scaling down the notion of angular momentum from classically spinning objects.

In quantum mechanics, angular momentum (like other quantities) is expressed as an operator, and its one-dimensional projections have quantized eigenvalues. Angular momentum is subject to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, implying that a ...[text shortened]... to spinning motion in the ordinary sense.[1]

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

Are you saying electrons are one-dimensional?