Talk:Lamb shift
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Low | This article is on a subject of Low importance within physics. |
|
Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|
You do not define k, and the quantity delta r in eq 1 does not appear in eqs 2 or 3. Presumably k=0 when delta r =0. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.130.158.95 (talk • contribs) 09:19, 9 June 2005.
- the delta-r is approximate and conceptual, not necessarily an exact metaphor. 12.178.36.25 17:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Is there a reference for "smearing out of the electron" -- I saw this on hyperphysics, also but not in any textbook on the Lamb shift. -- QED says the electron is a mathematical ideal point and so this statement seems at odds with best-accepted physical theory. 12.178.36.25 22:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Aha. Starting at the first QED correction above tree-level, the point-like electron's form factors of F_1() = 1, and F_2() = 0 -- receive small corrections. (Currently my references are in momentum-space, not in terms of spacial coordinates, so I hesitate to copy these textbook answers simply because k is often used for momentum in QED which is not the case here.) The result is that the high-order QED calculations resemble first-order QED calculations as if the electron were not point-like. How to explain this in encyclopedia-talk is a bit tricky. I would guess a whole section on "Modern (QED) Explanation" would be needed. The k() function which puzzled the other user was a simple numerical factor resulting from the geometry since only for l = 0 does the electron and nucleus closely interact. 12.178.36.25 17:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
