S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) Symmetry in Hydrogen Atom with Spin

Xing-Yan Fan Theoretical Physics Division, Chern Institute of Mathematics and LPMC, Nankai University, Tian** 300071, People’s Republic of China    Xiang-Ru Xie School of Physics, Nankai University, Tian** 300071, People’s Republic of China    Sheng-Ming Li School of Physics, Nankai University, Tian** 300071, People’s Republic of China    **g-Ling Chen [email protected] Theoretical Physics Division, Chern Institute of Mathematics and LPMC, Nankai University, Tian** 300071, People’s Republic of China
(May 1, 2024)
Abstract

As the simplest atom in nature, the hydrogen atom has been explored thoroughly from the perspective of non-relativistic quantum mechanics to relativistic quantum mechanics. Among the research on hydrogen atom, its energy level is the most basic, which can be obtained more conveniently predicated on the S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry than the wave-equation resolution. Moreover, β€œspin” is another indispensable topic in quantum mechanics, appearing as an intrinsic degree of freedom. In this work, we generalize the quantum Runge-Lenz vector to a spin-dependent one, and then extract a novel Hamiltonian of hydrogen atom with spin based on the requirement of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry. Furthermore, the energy spectrum of hydrogen atom with spin potentials is also determined by the remarkable approach of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry. Our findings extend the ground of hydrogen atom, and may contribute to other complicated models based on hydrogen atom.

I Introduction

After the birth of quantum mechanics (QM), the SchrΓΆdinger equation was used to address the problem of hydrogen atom (HA), which underlies the solution to other problem involving Coulomb interaction in QM, such as the problem of hydrogen-like atom GrinerQMHAtom . Furthermore, the triumph of computing its energy spectrum prompt physicists to research on other questions covering HA using quantum theory, for example, the low-energy scattering through HAs 1962RMPBurke , the perturbations of HA 2010RMPEfstathiou , or the long-range interaction of HAs at finite temperatures 2024PRAZalialiutdinov .

As is well known that symmetry is instrumental importantly in solving the HA problem 2022A1CourSym . Explicitly, the spherical symmetry helps us decompose the SchrΓΆdinger equation into the radial and angular parts, thus simplifying the complicated partial differential equation to its ordinary partner; certainly if one merely focuses on the energy spectrum of HA, a succinct method can be adopted concerning S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry 1988PauliSO4 ; GrinerSymSO4 ; 1991Lange . Thereafter, this hidden symmetry drew more attention 1966RMPBANDER1 ; 1966RMPBANDER2 . For instance, it was used to explicate the Stark states of HA as an irreducible representation of the O⁒(4)𝑂4O(4)italic_O ( 4 ) group 1967PPSHughes ; more its subgroup reductions were considered in distinct bases 1976SIAMJAM ; it was investigated even in virtue of the computer algebra system 2021CPCSzriftgiser .

Another essential conception β€œspin” is also connected with the symmetry in QM intimately. Under the circumstance of non-relativistic QM (NQM), the S⁒U⁒(2)π‘†π‘ˆ2SU(2)italic_S italic_U ( 2 ) description for spin-1/2 system was revealed by Pauli 1927Pauli . Soon then Dirac finished the relativistic quantum-mechanical treatment for electron 1928Dirac ; emphatically, the β€œspinors” as well as the Dirac matrices (satisfying Clifford algebra) appeared for the first time, which were then developed as a branch of geometry, dubbed spin geometry 1989SpinGeo . It is worth mentioning that the spin-based symmetry is not just a theoretical object, but an experimentally-observed property in condensed matter physics, e.g., the spin-group symmetry in magnetic materials 2022PRXLiu .

For a more prevalent taste of physicists, combining different symmetry will refresh their understanding of diverse models in QM. In this work, we advance the study of HA by pondering S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry and β€œspin” simultaneously, in turn, we successfully attain a spin-dependent Hamiltonian for HA that still possesses the S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry.

The article is organized as follows: In Sec. II, we make a brief review of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry by starting from the Hamiltonian of HA; In Sec. III, we consider an inverse problem, i.e., how to determine the Hamiltonian of the usual HA if one starts from the quantum Runge-Lenz (QRL) vector; In Sec. IV, we generalize the quantum Runge-Lenz vector with spin, and extract a Hamiltonian of HA with spin based on the requirement of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry; In Sec. V, the energy spectrum of HA with spin potentials is determined by the approach of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry; Conclusion and discussion are made in the Sec. VI.

II Brief Review of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) Symmetry in Hydrogen Atom

The Hamiltonian of HA is given byΒ GrinerQMHAtom

H=p→ 22⁒Mβˆ’ΞΊr,𝐻superscript→𝑝22π‘€πœ…π‘ŸH=\dfrac{\vec{p}^{\,2}}{2M}-\dfrac{\kappa}{r},italic_H = divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_ΞΊ end_ARG start_ARG italic_r end_ARG , (1)

where pβ†’=(px,py,pz)→𝑝subscript𝑝π‘₯subscript𝑝𝑦subscript𝑝𝑧\vec{p}=(p_{x},p_{y},p_{z})overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG = ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is the linear momentum operator; M=[me⁒mp/(me+mp)]𝑀delimited-[]subscriptπ‘šesubscriptπ‘špsubscriptπ‘šesubscriptπ‘špM=[m_{\rm e}m_{\rm p}/(m_{\rm e}+m_{\rm p})]italic_M = [ italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ( italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ] is the reduced mass with mesubscriptπ‘šem_{\rm e}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and mpsubscriptπ‘špm_{\rm p}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT representing the mass of electron and proton, respectively; ΞΊ=Z⁒e2πœ…π‘superscript𝑒2\kappa=Ze^{2}italic_ΞΊ = italic_Z italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and for HA, Z=1𝑍1Z=1italic_Z = 1; e𝑒eitalic_e depicts the absolute value of the charge involving an electron; r=|rβ†’|π‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿr=|\vec{r}|italic_r = | overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG | indicates the norm of coordinate operator rβ†’=(rx,ry,rz)β†’π‘Ÿsubscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘₯subscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘¦subscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘§\vec{r}=(r_{x},r_{y},r_{z})overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG = ( italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) regarding the relative motion between electron and proton.

One may define the orbital angular momentum operator as

β„“β†’=rβ†’Γ—pβ†’,β†’β„“β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘\vec{\ell}=\vec{r}\times\vec{p},overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG = overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG , (2)

which satisfies the definition of angular momentum

β„“β†’Γ—β„“β†’=i⁒ℏ⁒ℓ→,β†’β„“β†’β„“iPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’β„“\vec{\ell}\times\vec{\ell}={\rm i}\hbar\,\vec{\ell},overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG = roman_i roman_ℏ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG , (3)

or in a commutator form as

[β„“u,β„“v]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒ℓw,subscriptℓ𝑒subscriptℓ𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptℓ𝑀\left[{\ell}_{u},{\ell}_{v}\right]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}{\ell}_{w},[ roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (4)

with Ο΅u⁒v⁒wsubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀\epsilon_{uvw}italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT being the Levi-Civita symbol, and Ο΅x⁒y⁒z=Ο΅y⁒z⁒x=Ο΅z⁒x⁒y=+1subscriptitalic-Ο΅π‘₯𝑦𝑧subscriptitalic-ϡ𝑦𝑧π‘₯subscriptitalic-ϡ𝑧π‘₯𝑦1\epsilon_{xyz}=\epsilon_{yzx}=\epsilon_{zxy}=+1italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = + 1, Ο΅z⁒y⁒x=Ο΅y⁒x⁒z=Ο΅x⁒z⁒y=βˆ’1subscriptitalic-ϡ𝑧𝑦π‘₯subscriptitalic-ϡ𝑦π‘₯𝑧subscriptitalic-Ο΅π‘₯𝑧𝑦1\epsilon_{zyx}=\epsilon_{yxz}=\epsilon_{xzy}=-1italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 1.

Due to

[β„“u,rv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒rw,[β„“u,pv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒pw,formulae-sequencesubscriptℓ𝑒subscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘£iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘€subscriptℓ𝑒subscript𝑝𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript𝑝𝑀\displaystyle\left[{\ell}_{u},r_{v}\right]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}r_{w},% \;\;\;\;\left[{\ell}_{u},p_{v}\right]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}p_{w},[ roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , [ roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (5)

it is easy to have

[β„“β†’,r]=0,[β„“β†’,p→ 2]=0,formulae-sequenceβ†’β„“π‘Ÿ0β†’β„“superscript→𝑝20\left[\vec{\ell},\,r\right]=0,\;\;\;\left[\vec{\ell},\,\vec{p}^{\,2}\right]=0,[ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG , italic_r ] = 0 , [ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG , overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = 0 , (6)

and then one proves that

[H,β„“β†’]=0.𝐻→ℓ0\left[H,\,\vec{\ell}\,\right]=0.[ italic_H , overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG ] = 0 . (7)

Notably, Eq. (4) implies that a HA system possesses S⁒O⁒(3)𝑆𝑂3SO(3)italic_S italic_O ( 3 ) symmetry.

However, the HA can have a hidden symmetry of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) owing to the existence of the quantum Runge-Lenz (QRL) vector, defined byΒ 1988PauliSO4 ; GrinerSymSO4

Rβ†’=12⁒M⁒(pβ†’Γ—β„“β†’βˆ’β„“β†’Γ—pβ†’)βˆ’ΞΊβ’rβ†’r,→𝑅12π‘€β†’π‘β†’β„“β†’β„“β†’π‘πœ…β†’π‘Ÿπ‘Ÿ\displaystyle\vec{R}=\dfrac{1}{2M}\left(\vec{p}\times\vec{\ell}-\vec{\ell}% \times\vec{p}\right)-\kappa\,\dfrac{\vec{r}}{r},overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG - overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG ) - italic_ΞΊ divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r end_ARG , (8)

which satisfies

Rβ†’Γ—Rβ†’=βˆ’2⁒HM⁒i⁒ℏ⁒ℓ→,→𝑅→𝑅2𝐻𝑀iPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’β„“\displaystyle\vec{R}\times\vec{R}=\dfrac{-2H}{M}{\rm i}\hbar\,\vec{\ell},overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG = divide start_ARG - 2 italic_H end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG roman_i roman_ℏ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG , (9)

and

[H,Rβ†’]=0,𝐻→𝑅0\displaystyle\left[H,\vec{R}\right]=0,[ italic_H , overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG ] = 0 , (10a)
β„“β†’β‹…Rβ†’=Rβ†’β‹…β„“β†’=0,⋅→ℓ→𝑅⋅→𝑅→ℓ0\displaystyle\vec{\ell}\cdot\vec{R}=\vec{R}\cdot\vec{\ell}=0,overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG = overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG = 0 , (10b)
R→ 2=2⁒HM⁒(ℓ→ 2+ℏ2)+ΞΊ2,superscript→𝑅22𝐻𝑀superscriptβ†’β„“2superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2superscriptπœ…2\displaystyle\vec{R}^{\,2}=\dfrac{2H}{M}\left(\vec{\ell}^{\,2}+\hbar^{2}\right% )+\kappa^{2},overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 2 italic_H end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) + italic_ΞΊ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (10c)
[β„“u,Rv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Rw.subscriptℓ𝑒subscript𝑅𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript𝑅𝑀\displaystyle\left[{\ell}_{u},\,{R}_{v}\right]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}R_{% w}.[ roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (10d)

Since {β„“β†’,Rβ†’}→ℓ→𝑅\{\vec{\ell},\vec{R}\}{ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG , overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG } satisfy the following S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) algebraic relations (up to a re-scaling factor M/(βˆ’2⁒H)𝑀2𝐻\sqrt{M/(-2H)}square-root start_ARG italic_M / ( - 2 italic_H ) end_ARG multiplied together R→→𝑅\vec{R}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG)

[β„“u,β„“v]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒ℓw,subscriptℓ𝑒subscriptℓ𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptℓ𝑀\displaystyle\left[{\ell}_{u},{\ell}_{v}\right]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}{% \ell}_{w},[ roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (11a)
[β„“u,Rv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Rw,subscriptℓ𝑒subscript𝑅𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript𝑅𝑀\displaystyle\left[{\ell}_{u},{R}_{v}\right]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}{R}_{% w},[ roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (11b)
[Ru,Rv]=βˆ’2⁒HM⁒i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒ℓw,subscript𝑅𝑒subscript𝑅𝑣2𝐻𝑀iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptℓ𝑀\displaystyle\left[{R}_{u},{R}_{v}\right]=\frac{-2H}{M}{\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_% {uvw}{\ell}_{w},[ italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = divide start_ARG - 2 italic_H end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (11c)

and thus the HA system possesses S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry.

III An Inverse Problem

A HA is a real physical system existing in nature. The Hamiltonian (1) of a HA can be recast to

H=p→ 22⁒M+Vcp⁒(r),𝐻superscript→𝑝22𝑀subscript𝑉cpπ‘ŸH=\dfrac{\vec{p}^{\,2}}{2M}+V_{\rm cp}(r),italic_H = divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG + italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cp end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r ) , (12)

where

Vcp⁒(r)=βˆ’ΞΊrsubscript𝑉cpπ‘Ÿπœ…π‘ŸV_{\rm cp}(r)=-\dfrac{\kappa}{r}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cp end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r ) = - divide start_ARG italic_ΞΊ end_ARG start_ARG italic_r end_ARG (13)

represents the well-known Coulomb potential (CP). In the previous section, we have considered a forward problem: Given the Hamiltonian of a HA, can one determine its underlying symmetry? The answer is positive. The underlying symmetry is just S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry, as shown in Eqs. (11a)-(11c).

In this section, let us consider an inverse problem: Given the underlying S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry, can one construct the Hamiltonian of a HA (or derive the CP)? The answer is still positive. The key point is the QRL vector; if one focuses on Eq. (9), he will find that the Hamiltonian H𝐻Hitalic_H can be extracted from Rβ†’Γ—R→→𝑅→𝑅\vec{R}\times\vec{R}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG by requiring the result proportional to H⁒ℓ→𝐻→ℓH\,\vec{\ell}italic_H overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG. The following is the procedure of construction.

Without lose of generality, let us define the QRL vector in the following form:

Rβ†’=12⁒M⁒(pβ†’Γ—β„“β†’βˆ’β„“β†’Γ—pβ†’)+f⁒(r)⁒rβ†’,→𝑅12π‘€β†’π‘β†’β„“β†’β„“β†’π‘π‘“π‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿ\displaystyle\vec{R}=\dfrac{1}{2M}\left(\vec{p}\times\vec{\ell}-\vec{\ell}% \times\vec{p}\right)+f(r)\,\vec{r},overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG - overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG ) + italic_f ( italic_r ) overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG , (14)

where f⁒(r)π‘“π‘Ÿf(r)italic_f ( italic_r ) is a certain function depending on rπ‘Ÿritalic_r, and we only require

[β„“β†’,f⁒(r)]=0.β†’β„“π‘“π‘Ÿ0\displaystyle[\vec{\ell},f(r)]=0.[ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG , italic_f ( italic_r ) ] = 0 . (15)

If one compares Eq. (8) and Eq. (14), one may notice that

f⁒(r)=βˆ’ΞΊr.π‘“π‘Ÿπœ…π‘Ÿ\displaystyle f(r)=-\dfrac{\kappa}{r}.italic_f ( italic_r ) = - divide start_ARG italic_ΞΊ end_ARG start_ARG italic_r end_ARG . (16)

However, suppose we do not know it in the beginning, thus temporarily treating f⁒(r)π‘“π‘Ÿf(r)italic_f ( italic_r ) as an unknown function.

By direct calculation, we easily have

[β„“u,β„“v]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒ℓw,subscriptℓ𝑒subscriptℓ𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptℓ𝑀\displaystyle[{\ell}_{u},\ {\ell}_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}\,{\ell}_{w},[ roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (17)
[β„“u,Rv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Rw.subscriptℓ𝑒subscript𝑅𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript𝑅𝑀\displaystyle[{\ell}_{u},\ {R}_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}\,{R}_{w}.[ roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (18)

The underlying S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry requires the following commutative relation

[Ru,Rv]∝i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒ℓw,proportional-tosubscript𝑅𝑒subscript𝑅𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptℓ𝑀\displaystyle[{R}_{u},\ {R}_{v}]\propto{\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}\,{\ell}_{w},[ italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∝ roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (19)

i.e., [Ru,Rv]subscript𝑅𝑒subscript𝑅𝑣[{R}_{u},\ {R}_{v}][ italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is required to be proportional to β„“wsubscriptℓ𝑀\ell_{w}roman_β„“ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and the proportional coefficient is related to the Hamiltonian H𝐻Hitalic_H of a HA. To reach this purpose, let us compute the commutator [Rx,Ry]subscript𝑅π‘₯subscript𝑅𝑦[{R}_{x},\ {R}_{y}][ italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ], or Rβ†’Γ—R→→𝑅→𝑅\vec{R}\times\vec{R}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG.

The result gives

Rβ†’Γ—R→→𝑅→𝑅\displaystyle\vec{R}\times\vec{R}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG =\displaystyle== βˆ’i⁒ℏ⁒2M⁒(p→ 22⁒M+12⁒{[βˆ‡β†’β’f⁒(r)]β‹…rβ†’+3⁒f⁒(r)})⁒ℓ→iPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2𝑀superscript→𝑝22𝑀12β‹…delimited-[]β†’βˆ‡π‘“π‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿ3π‘“π‘Ÿβ†’β„“\displaystyle-{\rm i}\hbar\dfrac{2}{M}\biggl{(}\dfrac{\vec{p}^{\,2}}{2\,M}+% \dfrac{1}{2}\Bigl{\{}\big{[}\vec{\nabla}f(r)\big{]}\cdot\vec{r}+3\,f(r)\Bigr{% \}}\biggr{)}\vec{\ell}- roman_i roman_ℏ divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG ( divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG { [ overβ†’ start_ARG βˆ‡ end_ARG italic_f ( italic_r ) ] β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG + 3 italic_f ( italic_r ) } ) overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG (20)
=\displaystyle== βˆ’2⁒HM⁒i⁒ℏ⁒ℓ→,2𝐻𝑀iPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’β„“\displaystyle\dfrac{-2H}{M}{\rm i}\hbar\,\vec{\ell},divide start_ARG - 2 italic_H end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG roman_i roman_ℏ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG ,

based on which we can immediately extract a Hamiltonian as

H=p→ 22⁒M+𝒱⁒(r),𝐻superscript→𝑝22π‘€π’±π‘Ÿ\displaystyle H=\dfrac{\vec{p}^{\,2}}{2M}+{\cal V}(r),italic_H = divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG + caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) , (21)

with the potential function

𝒱⁒(r)π’±π‘Ÿ\displaystyle{\cal V}(r)caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) =\displaystyle== 12⁒{[βˆ‡β†’β’f⁒(r)]β‹…rβ†’+3⁒f⁒(r)}12β‹…delimited-[]β†’βˆ‡π‘“π‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿ3π‘“π‘Ÿ\displaystyle\dfrac{1}{2}\Bigl{\{}\big{[}\vec{\nabla}f(r)\big{]}\cdot\vec{r}+3% \,f(r)\Bigr{\}}divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG { [ overβ†’ start_ARG βˆ‡ end_ARG italic_f ( italic_r ) ] β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG + 3 italic_f ( italic_r ) } (22)
=\displaystyle== 12⁒{r⁒f′⁒(r)+3⁒f⁒(r)}.12π‘Ÿsuperscriptπ‘“β€²π‘Ÿ3π‘“π‘Ÿ\displaystyle\dfrac{1}{2}\Bigl{\{}rf^{\prime}(r)+3\,f(r)\Bigr{\}}.divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG { italic_r italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) + 3 italic_f ( italic_r ) } .

It is easy to prove that

[β„“β†’,H]=0.→ℓ𝐻0\displaystyle\left[\vec{\ell},H\right]=0.[ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG , italic_H ] = 0 . (23)

Furthermore, we use the following condition

[Rβ†’,H]=0→𝑅𝐻0\displaystyle\left[\vec{R},H\right]=0[ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG , italic_H ] = 0 (24)

to determine the function f⁒(r)π‘“π‘Ÿf(r)italic_f ( italic_r ), for R→→𝑅\vec{R}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG is the conservation quantity of the Hamiltonian system. One can have

[Rβ†’,H]→𝑅𝐻\displaystyle[\vec{R},H][ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG , italic_H ] =\displaystyle== βˆ’i⁒ℏM⁒[βˆ‡β†’β’[𝒱⁒(r)βˆ’f⁒(r)]β‹…pβ†’]⁒rβ†’iPlanck-constant-over-2-pi𝑀delimited-[]β‹…β†’βˆ‡delimited-[]π’±π‘Ÿπ‘“π‘Ÿβ†’π‘β†’π‘Ÿ\displaystyle\dfrac{-{\rm i}\hbar}{M}\left[\vec{\nabla}\left[{\cal V}(r)-f(r)% \right]\cdot\vec{p}\right]\vec{r}divide start_ARG - roman_i roman_ℏ end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG [ overβ†’ start_ARG βˆ‡ end_ARG [ caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) - italic_f ( italic_r ) ] β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG ] overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG (25)
+i⁒ℏM⁒[(βˆ‡β†’β’π’±β’(r))β‹…rβ†’+f⁒(r)]⁒pβ†’iPlanck-constant-over-2-pi𝑀delimited-[]β‹…β†’βˆ‡π’±π‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿπ‘“π‘Ÿβ†’π‘\displaystyle+\dfrac{{\rm i}\hbar}{M}\left[\left(\vec{\nabla}{\cal V}(r)\right% )\cdot\vec{r}+f(r)\right]\vec{p}+ divide start_ARG roman_i roman_ℏ end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG [ ( overβ†’ start_ARG βˆ‡ end_ARG caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) ) β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG + italic_f ( italic_r ) ] overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG
+ℏ22⁒M⁒(βˆ‡β†’2⁒f⁒(r))⁒rβ†’,superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi22𝑀superscriptβ†’βˆ‡2π‘“π‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿ\displaystyle+\dfrac{\hbar^{2}}{2M}\left(\vec{\nabla}^{2}f(r)\right)\vec{r},+ divide start_ARG roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG βˆ‡ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_r ) ) overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG ,

and thus

βˆ‡β†’β’[𝒱⁒(r)βˆ’f⁒(r)]=0,β†’βˆ‡delimited-[]π’±π‘Ÿπ‘“π‘Ÿ0\displaystyle\vec{\nabla}\left[{\cal V}(r)-f(r)\right]=0,overβ†’ start_ARG βˆ‡ end_ARG [ caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) - italic_f ( italic_r ) ] = 0 , (26a)
(βˆ‡β†’β’π’±β’(r))β‹…rβ†’+f⁒(r)=0,β‹…β†’βˆ‡π’±π‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿπ‘“π‘Ÿ0\displaystyle\left(\vec{\nabla}{\cal V}(r)\right)\cdot\vec{r}+f(r)=0,( overβ†’ start_ARG βˆ‡ end_ARG caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) ) β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG + italic_f ( italic_r ) = 0 , (26b)
βˆ‡β†’2⁒f⁒(r)=0,superscriptβ†’βˆ‡2π‘“π‘Ÿ0\displaystyle\vec{\nabla}^{2}f(r)=0,overβ†’ start_ARG βˆ‡ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_r ) = 0 , (26c)

which lead to

𝒱⁒(r)=f⁒(r)=Cr.π’±π‘Ÿπ‘“π‘ŸπΆπ‘Ÿ\displaystyle{\cal V}(r)=f(r)=\dfrac{C}{r}.caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) = italic_f ( italic_r ) = divide start_ARG italic_C end_ARG start_ARG italic_r end_ARG . (27)

Consequently, by choosing C=βˆ’ΞΊπΆπœ…C=-\kappaitalic_C = - italic_ΞΊ we have successfully constructed the Hamiltonian of a HA by starting from the QRL vector.

This significant finding of the inverse problem is very helpful for studying a more complicated Hamiltonian under the constraint of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry. In the next section, based on S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry we will construct the Hamiltonian of HA with spin.

IV Constructing the Hamiltonian of Hydrogen Atom with Spin

To construct the Hamiltonian of HA with spin, we need to generalize the orbital angular momentum β„“β†’β†’β„“\vec{\ell}overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG and the spin-independent QPL vector R→→𝑅\vec{R}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG to the spin-dependent ones, namely, β„“β†’β‡’J→⇒→ℓ→𝐽\vec{\ell}\Rightarrow\vec{J}overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG β‡’ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG and R→⇒ℛ→⇒→𝑅→ℛ\vec{R}\Rightarrow\vec{\mathcal{R}}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG β‡’ overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG, where J→→𝐽\vec{J}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG and β„›β†’β†’β„›\vec{\mathcal{R}}overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG depend on the spin angular momentum operator S→→𝑆\vec{S}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG, which satisfies the definition of angular momentum

Sβ†’Γ—Sβ†’=i⁒ℏ⁒Sβ†’,→𝑆→𝑆iPlanck-constant-over-2-pi→𝑆\vec{S}\times\vec{S}={\rm i}\hbar\,\vec{S},overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG = roman_i roman_ℏ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG , (28)

or in a commutator form as

[Su,Sv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Sw.subscript𝑆𝑒subscript𝑆𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript𝑆𝑀\left[{S}_{u},{S}_{v}\right]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}{S}_{w}.[ italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (29)

Our main result is the following theorem:

Theorem 1.

Let

Jβ†’=β„“β†’+μ⁒Sβ†’,β†’π½β†’β„“πœ‡β†’π‘†\displaystyle\vec{J}=\vec{\ell}+\mu\vec{S},overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG = overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG + italic_ΞΌ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG , (30a)
β„›β†’=12⁒M⁒(Ξ β†’Γ—Jβ†’βˆ’Jβ†’Γ—Ξ β†’)+h⁒(r)⁒rβ†’,β†’β„›12π‘€β†’Ξ β†’π½β†’π½β†’Ξ β„Žπ‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿ\displaystyle\vec{\cal R}=\dfrac{1}{2\,M}\big{(}\vec{\Pi}\times\vec{J}-\vec{J}% \times\vec{\Pi}\big{)}+h(r)\,\vec{r},overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG - overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG ) + italic_h ( italic_r ) overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG , (30b)

and then they satisfy the S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) commutation relations (up to a re-scaling factor multiplied together β„›β†’β†’β„›\vec{\cal R}overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG)

[Ju,Jv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Jw,subscript𝐽𝑒subscript𝐽𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript𝐽𝑀\displaystyle[J_{u},\ J_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}J_{w},[ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (31a)
[Ju,β„›v]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒ℛw,subscript𝐽𝑒subscriptℛ𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptℛ𝑀\displaystyle[J_{u},\ {\cal R}_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}{\cal R}_{w},[ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (31b)
[β„›u,β„›v]∝i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒ℋ⁒Jw,proportional-tosubscriptℛ𝑒subscriptℛ𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀ℋsubscript𝐽𝑀\displaystyle[{\cal R}_{u},\ {\cal R}_{v}]\propto{\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}{% \cal H}\,J_{w},[ caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∝ roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_H italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (31c)

and

[Jβ†’,β„‹]=0,→𝐽ℋ0\displaystyle[\vec{J},\,{\cal H}]=0,[ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG , caligraphic_H ] = 0 , (32a)
[ℛ→,ℋ]=0.→ℛℋ0\displaystyle[\vec{\cal R},\,{\cal H}]=0.[ over→ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG , caligraphic_H ] = 0 . (32b)

Here the Hamiltonian of HA with spin reads

β„‹=Ξ β†’22⁒M+𝒱⁒(r),β„‹superscriptβ†’Ξ 22π‘€π’±π‘Ÿ\displaystyle{\cal H}=\dfrac{\vec{\Pi}^{2}}{2\,M}+{\cal V}(r),caligraphic_H = divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG + caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) , (33)

with

Ξ β†’=pβ†’βˆ’Aβ†’,→Π→𝑝→𝐴\displaystyle\vec{\Pi}=\vec{p}-\vec{A},overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG = overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG - overβ†’ start_ARG italic_A end_ARG , (34a)
Aβ†’=μ⁒(rβ†’Γ—Sβ†’)r2,β†’π΄πœ‡β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†superscriptπ‘Ÿ2\displaystyle\vec{A}=\mu\dfrac{(\vec{r}\times\vec{S})}{r^{2}},overβ†’ start_ARG italic_A end_ARG = italic_ΞΌ divide start_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (34b)
h⁒(r)=k1r+k2⁒μ⁒rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’r2,β„Žπ‘Ÿsubscriptπ‘˜1π‘Ÿsubscriptπ‘˜2πœ‡β‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†superscriptπ‘Ÿ2\displaystyle h(r)=\dfrac{k_{1}}{r}+k_{2}\,\mu\,\dfrac{\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S}}{r^% {2}},italic_h ( italic_r ) = divide start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r end_ARG + italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ΞΌ divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (34c)
𝒱⁒(r)=h⁒(r)+μ⁒12⁒M⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’)2r4,π’±π‘Ÿβ„Žπ‘Ÿπœ‡12𝑀superscriptβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†2superscriptπ‘Ÿ4\displaystyle{\cal V}(r)=h(r)+\mu\dfrac{1}{2\,M}\dfrac{(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S})^{% 2}}{r^{4}},caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) = italic_h ( italic_r ) + italic_ΞΌ divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG divide start_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (34d)

k1subscriptπ‘˜1k_{1}italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and k2subscriptπ‘˜2k_{2}italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are two constants, and ΞΌ=0,1πœ‡01\mu=0,1italic_ΞΌ = 0 , 1.

Proof.

We divide five steps to complete the proof.

Step 1: Construction of J→→𝐽\vec{J}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG and Proving Eq. (31a).β€”Since the orbital angular momentum β„“β†’β†’β„“\vec{\ell}overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG and the spin operator S→→𝑆\vec{S}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG are defined in the external and internal spaces respectively, they are mutually commutative. If we define the β€œtotal” angular momentum operator as

Jβ†’=β„“β†’+Sβ†’,→𝐽→ℓ→𝑆\displaystyle\vec{J}=\vec{\ell}+\vec{S},overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG = overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG + overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG , (35)

then one immediately proves Eq. (31a). Here we have designed J→→𝐽\vec{J}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG in the form of Eq. (30a) with the parameter ΞΌπœ‡\muitalic_ΞΌ, to treat the HAs with and without spin in a unified way; namely, J→→𝐽\vec{J}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG reduces to β„“β†’β†’β„“\vec{\ell}overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG if ΞΌ=0πœ‡0\mu=0italic_ΞΌ = 0, and becomes Eq. (35) if ΞΌ=1πœ‡1\mu=1italic_ΞΌ = 1.

Step 2: Construction of β„›β†’β†’β„›\vec{\cal R}overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG and Proving Eq. (31b).β€”Similar to Ref. 2023FRSpinV , one can recast J→→𝐽\vec{J}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG to the following form

J→→𝐽\displaystyle\vec{J}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG =\displaystyle== β„“β†’+μ⁒Sβ†’β†’β„“πœ‡β†’π‘†\displaystyle\vec{\ell}+\mu\vec{S}overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG + italic_ΞΌ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG (36)
=\displaystyle== rβ†’Γ—(pβ†’βˆ’Aβ†’)+μ⁒eβ†’r⁒Srβ†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘β†’π΄πœ‡subscriptβ†’π‘’π‘Ÿsubscriptπ‘†π‘Ÿ\displaystyle\vec{r}\times(\vec{p}-\vec{A})+\mu\,\vec{e}_{r}S_{r}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG Γ— ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG - overβ†’ start_ARG italic_A end_ARG ) + italic_ΞΌ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=\displaystyle== rβ†’Γ—Ξ β†’+μ⁒eβ†’r⁒Sr;β†’π‘Ÿβ†’Ξ πœ‡subscriptβ†’π‘’π‘Ÿsubscriptπ‘†π‘Ÿ\displaystyle\vec{r}\times\vec{\Pi}+\mu\,\vec{e}_{r}S_{r};overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG + italic_ΞΌ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ;

then one extracts β€œcanonical” momentum Ξ β†’β†’Ξ \vec{\Pi}overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG of the electron in HA as in Eq. (34a), and the spin vector potential A→→𝐴\vec{A}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_A end_ARG induced by spin operator S→→𝑆\vec{S}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG of the proton in HA as Eq. (34b). Here the operator

S^r=r^β‹…Sβ†’,subscript^π‘†π‘Ÿβ‹…^π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†\displaystyle\hat{S}_{r}=\hat{r}\cdot\vec{S},over^ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = over^ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG , (37)

and r^=eβ†’r=rβ†’/r^π‘Ÿsubscriptβ†’π‘’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿπ‘Ÿ\hat{r}=\vec{e}_{r}=\vec{r}/rover^ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG = overβ†’ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG / italic_r.

After performing the following replacement

pβ†’β‡’Ξ β†’,β„“β†’β‡’Jβ†’,f⁒(r)β‡’h⁒(r),formulae-sequence⇒→𝑝→Πformulae-sequenceβ‡’β†’β„“β†’π½β‡’π‘“π‘Ÿβ„Žπ‘Ÿ\displaystyle\vec{p}\Rightarrow\vec{\Pi},\quad\vec{\ell}\Rightarrow\vec{J},% \quad f(r)\Rightarrow h(r),overβ†’ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG β‡’ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , overβ†’ start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG β‡’ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG , italic_f ( italic_r ) β‡’ italic_h ( italic_r ) , (38)

the QPL vector R→→𝑅\vec{R}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_R end_ARG is turned into the generalized QPL vector β„›β†’β†’β„›\vec{\cal R}overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG as shown in Eq. (30b), with h⁒(r)β„Žπ‘Ÿh(r)italic_h ( italic_r ) being a function of rπ‘Ÿritalic_r and (rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’)β‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S})( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) satisfying the commutation relation

[Jβ†’,h⁒(r)]=0.β†’π½β„Žπ‘Ÿ0\displaystyle[\vec{J},\,h(r)]=0.[ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG , italic_h ( italic_r ) ] = 0 . (39)

Due to the relations

[Ju,Jv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Jw,subscript𝐽𝑒subscript𝐽𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript𝐽𝑀\displaystyle[J_{u},\ J_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}J_{w},[ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (40a)
[Ju,Ξ v]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Πw,subscript𝐽𝑒subscriptΠ𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptΠ𝑀\displaystyle[J_{u},\ \Pi_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}\Pi_{w},[ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Ξ  start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ξ  start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (40b)
[Ju,(Ξ β†’Γ—Jβ†’)v]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒(Ξ β†’Γ—Jβ†’)w,subscript𝐽𝑒subscript→Π→𝐽𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript→Π→𝐽𝑀\displaystyle[J_{u},\ (\vec{\Pi}\times\vec{J})_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{% uvw}(\vec{\Pi}\times\vec{J})_{w},[ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ( overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (40c)
[Ju,(Jβ†’Γ—Ξ β†’)v]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒(Jβ†’Γ—Ξ β†’)w,subscript𝐽𝑒subscript→𝐽→Π𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript→𝐽→Π𝑀\displaystyle[J_{u},\ (\vec{J}\times\vec{\Pi})_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{% uvw}(\vec{J}\times\vec{\Pi})_{w},[ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (40d)
[Ju,rv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒rw,subscript𝐽𝑒subscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘£iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘€\displaystyle[J_{u},\ r_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}r_{w},[ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (40e)

one directly proves Eq. (31b).

Step 3: Proving Eq. (31c).β€”After careful deductions, one has

β„›β†’Γ—β„›β†’β†’β„›β†’β„›\displaystyle\vec{\cal R}\times\vec{\cal R}overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG =\displaystyle== iβ’β„β’βˆ’2M⁒{Ξ β†’22⁒M+12⁒[βˆ’1i⁒ℏ⁒[Ξ β†’,h⁒(r)]β‹…rβ†’+3⁒h⁒(r)+ΞΌM⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’)2r4]}⁒Jβ†’βˆ’ΞΌM⁒{[Ξ β†’,h⁒(r)]βˆ’i⁒ℏ⁒rβ†’r2⁒h⁒(r)}⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’).iPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2𝑀superscriptβ†’Ξ 22𝑀12delimited-[]β‹…1iPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’Ξ β„Žπ‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿ3β„Žπ‘Ÿπœ‡π‘€superscriptβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†2superscriptπ‘Ÿ4β†’π½πœ‡π‘€β†’Ξ β„Žπ‘ŸiPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’π‘Ÿsuperscriptπ‘Ÿ2β„Žπ‘Ÿβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†\displaystyle{\rm i}\hbar\,\dfrac{-2}{M}\Bigg{\{}\dfrac{\vec{\Pi}^{2}}{2\,M}+% \dfrac{1}{2}\bigg{[}-\dfrac{1}{{\rm i}\hbar}\big{[}\vec{\Pi},\ h(r)\big{]}% \cdot\vec{r}+3\,h(r)+\dfrac{\mu}{M}\dfrac{(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S})^{2}}{r^{4}}% \bigg{]}\Bigg{\}}\vec{J}-\dfrac{\mu}{M}\biggl{\{}\big{[}\vec{\Pi},\ h(r)\big{]% }-{\rm i}\hbar\dfrac{\vec{r}}{r^{2}}h(r)\biggr{\}}(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S}).roman_i roman_ℏ divide start_ARG - 2 end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG { divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG [ - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG roman_i roman_ℏ end_ARG [ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , italic_h ( italic_r ) ] β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG + 3 italic_h ( italic_r ) + divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG divide start_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ] } overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG { [ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , italic_h ( italic_r ) ] - roman_i roman_ℏ divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_h ( italic_r ) } ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) . (41)

To fulfill the requirement of Eq. (31c), one must have

β„‹=Ξ β†’22⁒M+𝒱⁒(r),β„‹superscriptβ†’Ξ 22π‘€π’±π‘Ÿ\displaystyle{\cal H}=\dfrac{\vec{\Pi}^{2}}{2\,M}+{\cal V}(r),caligraphic_H = divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_M end_ARG + caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) , (42a)
𝒱⁒(r)=12⁒[βˆ’1i⁒ℏ⁒[Ξ β†’,h⁒(r)]β‹…rβ†’+3⁒h⁒(r)+ΞΌM⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’)2r4],π’±π‘Ÿ12delimited-[]β‹…1iPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’Ξ β„Žπ‘Ÿβ†’π‘Ÿ3β„Žπ‘Ÿπœ‡π‘€superscriptβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†2superscriptπ‘Ÿ4\displaystyle{\cal V}(r)=\dfrac{1}{2}\bigg{[}-\dfrac{1}{{\rm i}\hbar}\big{[}% \vec{\Pi},\ h(r)\big{]}\cdot\vec{r}+3\,h(r)+\dfrac{\mu}{M}\dfrac{(\vec{r}\cdot% \vec{S})^{2}}{r^{4}}\bigg{]},caligraphic_V ( italic_r ) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG [ - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG roman_i roman_ℏ end_ARG [ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , italic_h ( italic_r ) ] β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG + 3 italic_h ( italic_r ) + divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG divide start_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ] , (42b)
ΞΌM⁒{[Ξ β†’,h⁒(r)]βˆ’i⁒ℏ⁒rβ†’r2⁒h⁒(r)}⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’)=0.πœ‡π‘€β†’Ξ β„Žπ‘ŸiPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’π‘Ÿsuperscriptπ‘Ÿ2β„Žπ‘Ÿβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†0\displaystyle\dfrac{\mu}{M}\biggl{\{}\big{[}\vec{\Pi},\ h(r)\big{]}-{\rm i}% \hbar\dfrac{\vec{r}}{r^{2}}h(r)\biggr{\}}(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S})=0.divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG { [ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , italic_h ( italic_r ) ] - roman_i roman_ℏ divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_h ( italic_r ) } ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) = 0 . (42c)

For ΞΌ=0πœ‡0\mu=0italic_ΞΌ = 0, Eq. (41) reduces to Eq. (20), and thus Eq. (31c) is proved. For ΞΌ=1πœ‡1\mu=1italic_ΞΌ = 1, from Eq. (42c) we obtain

[Ξ β†’,h⁒(r)]βˆ’i⁒ℏ⁒rβ†’r2⁒h⁒(r)=0.β†’Ξ β„Žπ‘ŸiPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’π‘Ÿsuperscriptπ‘Ÿ2β„Žπ‘Ÿ0\displaystyle\big{[}\vec{\Pi},\ h(r)\big{]}-{\rm i}\hbar\dfrac{\vec{r}}{r^{2}}% h(r)=0.[ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , italic_h ( italic_r ) ] - roman_i roman_ℏ divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_h ( italic_r ) = 0 . (43)

By setting

h⁒(r)=ΞΎ1⁒(r)+ΞΎ2⁒(r)⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’),β„Žπ‘Ÿsubscriptπœ‰1π‘Ÿsubscriptπœ‰2π‘Ÿβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†\displaystyle h(r)=\xi_{1}(r)+\xi_{2}(r)\left(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S}\right),italic_h ( italic_r ) = italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r ) + italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r ) ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) , (44)

one obtains the solution of h⁒(r)β„Žπ‘Ÿh(r)italic_h ( italic_r ) as shown in Eq. (34c) with ΞΎ1⁒(r)=k1/rsubscriptπœ‰1π‘Ÿsubscriptπ‘˜1π‘Ÿ\xi_{1}(r)=k_{1}/ritalic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r ) = italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_r and ΞΎ2⁒(r)=μ⁒k2/r2subscriptπœ‰2π‘Ÿπœ‡subscriptπ‘˜2superscriptπ‘Ÿ2\xi_{2}(r)=\mu k_{2}/r^{2}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r ) = italic_ΞΌ italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and hence Eq. (31c) is proved. After substituting Eq. (42c) into Eq. (42b), one has the potential function 𝒱𝒱{\cal V}caligraphic_V as in Eq. (34d).

Step 4: Proving Eq. (32a).β€” Due to the relations

[Jβ†’,Ξ β†’2]=0,→𝐽superscriptβ†’Ξ 20\displaystyle[\vec{J},\,\vec{\Pi}^{2}]=0,[ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG , overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = 0 , (45a)
[Jβ†’,r]=0,β†’π½π‘Ÿ0\displaystyle[\vec{J},\,r]=0,[ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG , italic_r ] = 0 , (45b)
[Jβ†’,rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’]=0,β†’π½β‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†0\displaystyle[\vec{J},\,\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S}]=0,[ overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG , overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ] = 0 , (45c)

one directly proves Eq. (32a).

Step 5: Proving Eq. (32b).β€” Due to Eq.Β (40a)-Eq.Β (40e), Eq.Β (45a)-Eq.Β (45c), and the following relations

[Ξ u,rv]=βˆ’i⁒ℏ⁒δu⁒v,subscriptΠ𝑒subscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘£iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscript𝛿𝑒𝑣\displaystyle[\Pi_{u},\ r_{v}]=-{\rm i}\hbar\,\delta_{uv},[ roman_Ξ  start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = - roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ξ΄ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (46a)
[Ξ β†’,1r]=i⁒ℏ⁒rβ†’r3,β†’Ξ 1π‘ŸiPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’π‘Ÿsuperscriptπ‘Ÿ3\displaystyle\bigg{[}\vec{\Pi},\ \dfrac{1}{r}\bigg{]}={\rm i}\hbar\dfrac{\vec{% r}}{r^{3}},[ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_r end_ARG ] = roman_i roman_ℏ divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (46b)
[Ξ β†’,1r2]=i⁒ℏ⁒2⁒rβ†’r4,β†’Ξ 1superscriptπ‘Ÿ2iPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2β†’π‘Ÿsuperscriptπ‘Ÿ4\displaystyle\bigg{[}\vec{\Pi},\ \dfrac{1}{r^{2}}\bigg{]}={\rm i}\hbar\dfrac{2% \,\vec{r}}{r^{4}},[ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ] = roman_i roman_ℏ divide start_ARG 2 overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (46c)
[Ξ u,Ξ v]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒ℬw,subscriptΠ𝑒subscriptΠ𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptℬ𝑀\displaystyle[\Pi_{u},\,\Pi_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}{\cal B}_{w},[ roman_Ξ  start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Ξ  start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (46d)
ℬ→=i⁒ℏ⁒μ⁒(ΞΌβˆ’2)⁒rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’r4⁒rβ†’,→ℬiPlanck-constant-over-2-piπœ‡πœ‡2β‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†superscriptπ‘Ÿ4β†’π‘Ÿ\displaystyle\vec{\cal B}={\rm i}\hbar\,\mu(\mu-2)\dfrac{\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S}}{% r^{4}}\vec{r},overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_B end_ARG = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_ΞΌ ( italic_ΞΌ - 2 ) divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG , (46e)
[Ξ β†’,Ξ β†’2]=i⁒ℏ⁒[(Π→×ℬ→)βˆ’(ℬ→×Π→)],β†’Ξ superscriptβ†’Ξ 2iPlanck-constant-over-2-pidelimited-[]→Π→ℬ→ℬ→Π\displaystyle[\vec{\Pi},\,\vec{\Pi}^{2}]={\rm i}\hbar\big{[}(\vec{\Pi}\times% \vec{\cal B})-(\vec{\cal B}\times\vec{\Pi})\big{]},[ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ [ ( overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_B end_ARG ) - ( overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_B end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG ) ] , (46f)
Ξ β†’Γ—Jβ†’+Jβ†’Γ—Ξ β†’=2⁒i⁒ℏ⁒Π→,→Π→𝐽→𝐽→Π2iPlanck-constant-over-2-piβ†’Ξ \displaystyle\vec{\Pi}\times\vec{J}+\vec{J}\times\vec{\Pi}=2{\rm i}\hbar\,\vec% {\Pi},overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG + overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG Γ— overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG = 2 roman_i roman_ℏ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , (46g)
[Ξ β†’,rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’r2]=i⁒ℏ⁒(ΞΌβˆ’1)⁒Sβ†’r2+i⁒ℏ⁒(2βˆ’ΞΌ)⁒rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’r4⁒rβ†’,β†’Ξ β‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†superscriptπ‘Ÿ2iPlanck-constant-over-2-piπœ‡1→𝑆superscriptπ‘Ÿ2iPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2πœ‡β‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†superscriptπ‘Ÿ4β†’π‘Ÿ\displaystyle\bigg{[}\vec{\Pi},\ \dfrac{\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S}}{r^{2}}\bigg{]}={% \rm i}\hbar(\mu-1)\dfrac{\vec{S}}{r^{2}}+{\rm i}\hbar(2-\mu)\frac{\vec{r}\cdot% \vec{S}}{r^{4}}\vec{r},[ overβ†’ start_ARG roman_Ξ  end_ARG , divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ] = roman_i roman_ℏ ( italic_ΞΌ - 1 ) divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG + roman_i roman_ℏ ( 2 - italic_ΞΌ ) divide start_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG , (46h)

with Ξ΄u⁒vsubscript𝛿𝑒𝑣\delta_{uv}italic_Ξ΄ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denoting the Kronecker delta symbol, one can directly prove Eq.Β (32b). ∎

V Energy Spectrum of Hydrogen Atom with Spin

In this section, we come to solve the energy spectrum of HA with spin based on the approach of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry. We restrict our problem to the Hilbert space of Hamiltonian β„‹β„‹{\cal H}caligraphic_H’s eigenstates, where we can replace β„‹β„‹{\cal H}caligraphic_H by its eigenvalue E𝐸Eitalic_E, and then Eq.Β (31c) becomes

[β„›u,β„›v]=βˆ’2⁒EM⁒i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Jw.subscriptℛ𝑒subscriptℛ𝑣2𝐸𝑀iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript𝐽𝑀\displaystyle[{\cal R}_{u},{\cal R}_{v}]=\dfrac{-2E}{M}{\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_% {uvw}\,J_{w}.[ caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = divide start_ARG - 2 italic_E end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (47)

If we define a re-scaling operator as

β„›β†’β€²=Mβˆ’2⁒E⁒ℛ→,superscript→ℛ′𝑀2𝐸→ℛ\displaystyle\vec{\cal R}^{\prime}=\sqrt{\dfrac{M}{-2E}}\,\vec{\cal R},overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG italic_M end_ARG start_ARG - 2 italic_E end_ARG end_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG , (48)

then J→→𝐽\vec{J}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG and β„›β†’β€²superscriptβ†’β„›β€²\vec{\cal R}^{\prime}overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fit the standard SO(4) algebra. Let us further define two new quantities as

Wβ†’=12⁒(Jβ†’+β„›β†’β€²),β†’π‘Š12→𝐽superscriptβ†’β„›β€²\displaystyle\vec{W}=\dfrac{1}{2}(\vec{J}+\vec{\cal R}^{\prime}),overβ†’ start_ARG italic_W end_ARG = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG + overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) , (49a)
Kβ†’=12⁒(Jβ†’βˆ’β„›β†’β€²).→𝐾12→𝐽superscriptβ†’β„›β€²\displaystyle\vec{K}=\dfrac{1}{2}(\vec{J}-\vec{\cal R}^{\prime}).overβ†’ start_ARG italic_K end_ARG = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG - overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) . (49b)

Then they satisfy the following commutators

[Wu,Wv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Ww,subscriptπ‘Šπ‘’subscriptπ‘Šπ‘£iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscriptπ‘Šπ‘€\displaystyle[W_{u},\ W_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}W_{w},[ italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (50a)
[Ku,Kv]=i⁒ℏ⁒ϡu⁒v⁒w⁒Kw,subscript𝐾𝑒subscript𝐾𝑣iPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptitalic-ϡ𝑒𝑣𝑀subscript𝐾𝑀\displaystyle[K_{u},\ K_{v}]={\rm i}\hbar\,\epsilon_{uvw}K_{w},[ italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = roman_i roman_ℏ italic_Ο΅ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (50b)
[Wu,Kv]=0,subscriptπ‘Šπ‘’subscript𝐾𝑣0\displaystyle[W_{u},\ K_{v}]=0,[ italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = 0 , (50c)

which implies that Wβ†’β†’π‘Š\vec{W}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_W end_ARG and K→→𝐾\vec{K}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_K end_ARG construct two independent S⁒U⁒(2)π‘†π‘ˆ2SU(2)italic_S italic_U ( 2 ) algebras GrinerSymSO4 ; hence the eigenvalues are given as Wβ†’2=w⁒(w+1)⁒ℏ2superscriptβ†’π‘Š2𝑀𝑀1superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2\vec{W}^{2}=w(w+1)\hbar^{2}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_W end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_w ( italic_w + 1 ) roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and Kβ†’2=k⁒(k+1)⁒ℏ2superscript→𝐾2π‘˜π‘˜1superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2\vec{K}^{2}=k(k+1)\hbar^{2}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_K end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_k ( italic_k + 1 ) roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, with k,w=0,1/2,1,3/2,…formulae-sequenceπ‘˜π‘€012132…k,w=0,1/2,1,3/2,\dotsitalic_k , italic_w = 0 , 1 / 2 , 1 , 3 / 2 , ….

We can have

Wβ†’2superscriptβ†’π‘Š2\displaystyle\vec{W}^{2}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_W end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT =\displaystyle== 14⁒(Jβ†’2+β„›β€²β†’2+2⁒Jβ†’β‹…β„›β€²β†’),14superscript→𝐽2superscriptβ†’superscriptβ„›β€²2β‹…2→𝐽→superscriptβ„›β€²\displaystyle\dfrac{1}{4}(\vec{J}^{2}+\vec{{\cal R}^{\prime}}^{2}+2\vec{J}% \cdot\vec{{\cal R}^{\prime}}),divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 2 overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) , (51a)
Kβ†’2superscript→𝐾2\displaystyle\vec{K}^{2}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_K end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT =\displaystyle== 14⁒(Jβ†’2+β„›β€²β†’2βˆ’2⁒Jβ†’β‹…β„›β€²β†’).14superscript→𝐽2superscriptβ†’superscriptβ„›β€²2β‹…2→𝐽→superscriptβ„›β€²\displaystyle\dfrac{1}{4}(\vec{J}^{2}+\vec{{\cal R}^{\prime}}^{2}-2\vec{J}% \cdot\vec{{\cal R}^{\prime}}).divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) . (51b)

Afterwards, by using

Jβ†’β‹…β„›β€²β†’=β„›β€²β†’β‹…Jβ†’=μ⁒Mβˆ’2⁒E⁒h⁒(r)⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’),⋅→𝐽→superscriptβ„›β€²β‹…β†’superscriptβ„›β€²β†’π½πœ‡π‘€2πΈβ„Žπ‘Ÿβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†\displaystyle\vec{J}\cdot\vec{{\cal R}^{\prime}}=\vec{{\cal R}^{\prime}}\cdot% \vec{J}=\mu\sqrt{\dfrac{M}{-2E}}\,h(r)(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S}),overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG = overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG = italic_ΞΌ square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG italic_M end_ARG start_ARG - 2 italic_E end_ARG end_ARG italic_h ( italic_r ) ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) , (52a)
β„›β€²β†’2=[μ⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’)2r2βˆ’J→ 2βˆ’β„2]βˆ’M2⁒E⁒[h⁒(r)]2⁒r2,superscriptβ†’superscriptβ„›β€²2delimited-[]πœ‡superscriptβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†2superscriptπ‘Ÿ2superscript→𝐽2superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2𝑀2𝐸superscriptdelimited-[]β„Žπ‘Ÿ2superscriptπ‘Ÿ2\displaystyle\vec{{\cal R}^{\prime}}^{2}=\left[\mu\dfrac{(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S})% ^{2}}{r^{2}}-\vec{J}^{\,2}-\hbar^{2}\right]-\dfrac{M}{2E}\big{[}h(r)\big{]}^{2% }r^{2},overβ†’ start_ARG caligraphic_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT β€² end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = [ italic_ΞΌ divide start_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG - overβ†’ start_ARG italic_J end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] - divide start_ARG italic_M end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_E end_ARG [ italic_h ( italic_r ) ] start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (52b)

we get

Wβ†’2+Kβ†’2superscriptβ†’π‘Š2superscript→𝐾2\displaystyle\vec{W}^{2}+\vec{K}^{2}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_W end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + overβ†’ start_ARG italic_K end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT =\displaystyle== 12⁒[μ⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’)2r2βˆ’β„2βˆ’M2⁒E⁒[h⁒(r)]2⁒r2],12delimited-[]πœ‡superscriptβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†2superscriptπ‘Ÿ2superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2𝑀2𝐸superscriptdelimited-[]β„Žπ‘Ÿ2superscriptπ‘Ÿ2\displaystyle\dfrac{1}{2}\bigg{[}{\mu}\dfrac{(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S})^{2}}{r^{2}}% -\hbar^{2}-\dfrac{M}{2E}\big{[}h(r)\big{]}^{2}r^{2}\bigg{]},divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG [ italic_ΞΌ divide start_ARG ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG - roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG italic_M end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_E end_ARG [ italic_h ( italic_r ) ] start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] , (53a)
Wβ†’2βˆ’Kβ†’2superscriptβ†’π‘Š2superscript→𝐾2\displaystyle\vec{W}^{2}-\vec{K}^{2}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_W end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - overβ†’ start_ARG italic_K end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT =\displaystyle== μ⁒Mβˆ’2⁒E⁒h⁒(r)⁒(rβ†’β‹…Sβ†’),πœ‡π‘€2πΈβ„Žπ‘Ÿβ‹…β†’π‘Ÿβ†’π‘†\displaystyle\mu\sqrt{\dfrac{M}{-2E}}\,h(r)\,(\vec{r}\cdot\vec{S}),italic_ΞΌ square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG italic_M end_ARG start_ARG - 2 italic_E end_ARG end_ARG italic_h ( italic_r ) ( overβ†’ start_ARG italic_r end_ARG β‹… overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) , (53b)

Furthermore, one can verify that

[S^r,β„‹]=0,subscript^π‘†π‘Ÿβ„‹0\displaystyle\left[\hat{S}_{r},\ {\cal H}\right]=0,[ over^ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , caligraphic_H ] = 0 , (54)

and therefore S^rsubscript^π‘†π‘Ÿ\hat{S}_{r}over^ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is also a conserved quantity for the Hamiltonian system, and we denote its eigenvalue as sr⁒ℏsubscriptπ‘ π‘ŸPlanck-constant-over-2-pis_{r}\hbaritalic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℏ. In the case of

Sβ†’=ℏ2⁒σ→→𝑆Planck-constant-over-2-pi2β†’πœŽ\displaystyle\vec{S}=\frac{\hbar}{2}\vec{\sigma}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG = divide start_ARG roman_ℏ end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG overβ†’ start_ARG italic_Οƒ end_ARG (55)

i.e., the spin-1/2121/21 / 2 operator, one has Sr2=(ℏ2/4)β’πŸ™superscriptsubscriptπ‘†π‘Ÿ2superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi24πŸ™S_{r}^{2}=(\hbar^{2}/4)\openoneitalic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / 4 ) blackboard_1, where Οƒβ†’β†’πœŽ\vec{\sigma}overβ†’ start_ARG italic_Οƒ end_ARG and πŸ™πŸ™\openoneblackboard_1 express the vector of Pauli matrices and identity matrix respectively, which means that sr=Β±1/2subscriptπ‘ π‘Ÿplus-or-minus12s_{r}=\pm 1/2italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = Β± 1 / 2.

After replacing the operators by their corresponding eigenvalues, Eq.Β (53a) and Eq.Β (53b) become

w⁒(w+1)⁒ℏ2+k⁒(k+1)⁒ℏ2=12⁒[μ⁒(sr⁒ℏ)2βˆ’β„2βˆ’M2⁒E⁒(k1+μ⁒k2⁒sr⁒ℏ)2],𝑀𝑀1superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2π‘˜π‘˜1superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi212delimited-[]πœ‡superscriptsubscriptπ‘ π‘ŸPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2𝑀2𝐸superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜1πœ‡subscriptπ‘˜2subscriptπ‘ π‘ŸPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2\displaystyle w(w+1)\hbar^{2}+k(k+1)\hbar^{2}=\dfrac{1}{2}\bigg{[}{\mu}(s_{r}% \hbar)^{2}-\hbar^{2}-\dfrac{M}{2E}(k_{1}+{\mu}\,k_{2}s_{r}\hbar)^{2}\bigg{]},italic_w ( italic_w + 1 ) roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_k ( italic_k + 1 ) roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG [ italic_ΞΌ ( italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℏ ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG italic_M end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_E end_ARG ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_ΞΌ italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℏ ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] , (56a)
w⁒(w+1)⁒ℏ2βˆ’k⁒(k+1)⁒ℏ2=μ⁒Mβˆ’2⁒E⁒(k1+μ⁒k2⁒sr⁒ℏ)⁒sr⁒ℏ.𝑀𝑀1superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2π‘˜π‘˜1superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2πœ‡π‘€2𝐸subscriptπ‘˜1πœ‡subscriptπ‘˜2subscriptπ‘ π‘ŸPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscriptπ‘ π‘ŸPlanck-constant-over-2-pi\displaystyle w(w+1)\hbar^{2}-k(k+1)\hbar^{2}=\mu\sqrt{\dfrac{M}{-2E}}\,\big{(% }k_{1}+{\mu}\,k_{2}s_{r}\hbar\big{)}s_{r}\hbar.italic_w ( italic_w + 1 ) roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_k ( italic_k + 1 ) roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_ΞΌ square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG italic_M end_ARG start_ARG - 2 italic_E end_ARG end_ARG ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_ΞΌ italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℏ ) italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℏ . (56b)

There is no solution for the energy E𝐸Eitalic_E if k1+μ⁒k2⁒sr⁒ℏ=0subscriptπ‘˜1πœ‡subscriptπ‘˜2subscriptπ‘ π‘ŸPlanck-constant-over-2-pi0k_{1}+{\mu}\,k_{2}s_{r}\hbar=0italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_ΞΌ italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℏ = 0. For k1+k2⁒sr⁒ℏ≠0subscriptπ‘˜1subscriptπ‘˜2subscriptπ‘ π‘ŸPlanck-constant-over-2-pi0k_{1}+k_{2}s_{r}\hbar\neq 0italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℏ β‰  0, one has the energy spectrum of HA with spin as

E≑En𝐸subscript𝐸𝑛\displaystyle E\equiv E_{n}italic_E ≑ italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== βˆ’M2⁒ℏ2⁒(k1+μ⁒k2⁒sr⁒ℏ)2(n±μ⁒sr)2,𝑀2superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜1πœ‡subscriptπ‘˜2subscriptπ‘ π‘ŸPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2superscriptplus-or-minusπ‘›πœ‡subscriptπ‘ π‘Ÿ2\displaystyle-\dfrac{M}{2\hbar^{2}}\dfrac{(k_{1}+\mu\,k_{2}s_{r}\hbar)^{2}}{% \big{(}n\pm\mu\,s_{r}\big{)}^{2}},- divide start_ARG italic_M end_ARG start_ARG 2 roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG divide start_ARG ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_ΞΌ italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℏ ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_n Β± italic_ΞΌ italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (57)

with n=2⁒w+1=1,2,3,….formulae-sequence𝑛2𝑀1123…n=2\,w+1=1,2,3,....italic_n = 2 italic_w + 1 = 1 , 2 , 3 , … . For ΞΌ=0πœ‡0\mu=0italic_ΞΌ = 0,

Ensubscript𝐸𝑛\displaystyle E_{n}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== βˆ’M⁒k122⁒ℏ2⁒1n2,𝑀superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜122superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi21superscript𝑛2\displaystyle-\dfrac{Mk_{1}^{2}}{2\hbar^{2}}\frac{1}{n^{2}},- divide start_ARG italic_M italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (58)

which reduces to the energy spectrum of the usual HA.

VI Conclusion and Discussion

To sum up, we have written down the spin-dependent QRL vector, constructed the Hamiltonian of HA with spin under the requirement of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry. The energy spectrum of the novel hamiltonian system is also determined by the approach of S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry, which reduces to the usual HA without considering spin. Our computations extend the investigation of HA from the perspective of spin potential, which may be applied to HA-based models in atomic physics and condensed matter physics.

Considering the relativistic treatments for HA with S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) approach have been fully studied, such as 2008PRAChen ; 2008PRAZhang ; 2023APEremko , it is our next object to explore the energy spectrum of HA with spin potential under the framework of relativistic quantum mechanics. Certainly, the connection of HA and harmonic oscillator is intimate (see e.g., 2020JPABars ), so our future work also includes the quantum harmonic oscillator with spin potential. Finally, we hope our consideration of HA with spin potential can be realized experimentally, or can be achieved through quantum simulation 2014QSim , in that a more complex model (i.e., Rydberg manifold 2022RydbQSim ) under S⁒O⁒(4)𝑆𝑂4SO(4)italic_S italic_O ( 4 ) symmetry has been simulated successfully.

Acknowledgements.
J.L.C. was supported by the National Natural Science Foundations of China (Grant Nos. 12275136 and 12075001) and the 111 Project of B23045. X.Y.F. was supported by the Nankai Zhide Foundations.

X.Y.F. and X.R.X. contributed equally to this work.

References

  • (1) W. Greiner, Charged Particles in Magnetic Fields, in Quantum Mechanics: An Introduction (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2001), pp. 205-245.
  • (2) P. G. Burke and K. Smith, The Low-Energy Scattering of Electrons and Positrons by Hydrogen Atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 34, 458 (1962).
  • (3) K. Efstathiou and D. A. SadovskiΓ­, Normalization and Global Analysis of Perturbations of the Hydrogen Atom, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 2099 (2010).
  • (4) T. Zalialiutdinov and D. Solovyev, Long-Range Interaction of Hydrogen Atoms at Finite Temperatures, Phys. Rev. A 109, 012816 (2024).
  • (5) G. Kunstatter and S. Das, The Hydrogen Atom, in A First Course on Symmetry, Special Relativity and Quantum Mechanics: The Foundations of Physics (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2022), pp. 253-283.
  • (6) W. Pauli, On the Hydrogen Spectrum from the Standpoint of the New Quantum Mechanics, in Dynamical Groups and Spectrum Generating Algebras (World Scientific Publishing Company, 1988), pp. 369-399.
  • (7) W. Greiner and B. MΓΌller, Dynamical Symmetries, in Quantum Mechanics: Symmetries (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1994), pp. 477-496.
  • (8) O. L. De Lange and R. E. Raab, Operator Methods in Quantum Mechanics (Clarendon, Oxford, 1991).
  • (9) M. Bander and C. Itzykson, Group Theory and the Hydrogen Atom (I), Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 330 (1966).
  • (10) M. Bander and C. Itzykson, Group Theory and the Hydrogen Atom (II), Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 346 (1966).
  • (11) J. W. B. Hughes, Stark States and O(4) Symmetry of Hydrogenic Atoms, Proc. Phys. Soc. 91, 810 (1967).
  • (12) E. G. Kalnins, W. Miller, Jr., and P. Winternitz, The Group O⁒(4)𝑂4O(4)italic_O ( 4 ), Separation of Variables and the Hydrogen Atom, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 30, 630 (1976).
  • (13) P. Szriftgiser and E. S. Cheb-Terrab, Computer Algebra in Physics: The Hidden SO(4) Symmetry of the Hydrogen Atom, Comput. Phys. Commun. 268, 108076 (2021).
  • (14) W. Pauli Jr., Zur Quantenmechanik des magnetischen Elektrons, Z. Phys. 43, 601 (1927).
  • (15) P. A. M. Dirac, The quantum theory of the electron, Proc. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 117, 610 (1928).
  • (16) H. B. Lawson and M.-L. Michelsohn, Spin Geometry (Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1989).
  • (17) P. Liu, J. Li, J. Han, X. Wan, and Q. Liu, Spin-Group Symmetry in Magnetic Materials with Negligible Spin-Orbit Coupling, Phys. Rev. X 12, 021016 (2022).
  • (18) J. L. Chen, X. Y. Fan, and X. R. Xie, Spin Vector Potential and Spin Aharonov-Bohm Effect, Fundam. Res. (2023); arXiv:2211.07178.
  • (19) J. L. Chen, D. L. Deng, and M. G. Hu, SO(4) Symmetry in the Relativistic Hydrogen Atom, Phys. Rev. A 77, 034102 (2008).
  • (20) F. L. Zhang, B. Fu, and J. L. Chen, Dynamical Symmetry of Dirac Hydrogen Atom with Spin Symmetry and Its Connection with Ginocchio’s Oscillator, Phys. Rev. A 78, 040101 (2008).
  • (21) A. Eremko, L. Brizhik, and V. Loktev, Algebra of the Spinor Invariants and the Relativistic Hydrogen Atom, Ann. Phys. 451, 169266 (2023).
  • (22) I. Bars and J. L. Rosner, Duality between Hydrogen Atom and Oscillator Systems via Hidden SO(d,2) Symmetry and 2T-Physics, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 53, 234001 (2020).
  • (23) I. M. Georgescu, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Quantum Simulation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 153 (2014).
  • (24) A. Kruckenhauser, R. van Bijnen, T. V. Zache, M. D. Liberto, and P. Zoller, High-Dimensional SO(4)-Symmetric Rydberg Manifolds for Quantum Simulation, Quantum Sci. Technol. 8, 015020 (2022).