# Talk:Azimuthal quantum number

WikiProject Physics (Rated C-class, High-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Chemistry (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

I've replaced the term state with the more appropriate orbital, as state refers to the combined condition of all the electrons in the atom, rather than the one (or two) in the orbital.--Ian 08:21, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

## Contents

the azimuthal quantum number maybe could be merged with the orbital angular momentum quantum number as they are the same thing! agreed67.70.129.22 19:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

## Contradictory sentences in history section.

In the history section, is the following:

"Bohr argued that the angular momentum in any orbit n was nKh, where h is Planck's constant and K is some multiplying factor, the same for all the orbits, which was later determined to be 1/2π. The lowest quantum level therefore had an angular momentum of zero."

Since the lowest value for n is 1, we get L = h/2π, not zero.

The last sentence makes no sense, since according to the first sentence the angular momentum was not zero.

This should be sorted out, as the two sentences totally contradict each other.

This history section is very poor. There is the contradiction mentioned above, and most of the paragraph is concerned with things somewhat unrelated to the orbital quantum number. It desperately needs fixing, and for now I'll remove some of the worst chunks. --Latch.r 05:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

## Proof needed

Can anybody put the proof of $\mathbf{L^2\boldsymbol{\psi}} = \hbar^2{l(l+1)}\boldsymbol{\psi}$ into the article? --83.131.82.102 (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

## Derivation

Interesting. A derivation section in which nothing is derived. I agree w/ the above comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.94.156.170 (talk) 20:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

"The letters after the f sub-shell just follow f in alphabetical order except those already used. One mnemonic to remember the sequence S. P. D. F. G. H. ... is "Sober Physicists Don't Find Giraffes Hiding In Kitchens Like My Nephew" "

Surely this is wrong? J comes after I, not K. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.173.197.85 (talk) 19:43, 29 November 2013 (UTC)