Closed jagot closed 3 years ago
I would vote for the ^
and v
as it would be the most obvious in my opinion. For the relativistic ones, the parenthesis syntax is what I have resorted to when I have needed to write down fully qualified orbitals, so it also seems like a good choice to me.
Funnily enough, I sort of prefer a/b
:), but I think we can support both in string macros, and use ^/v
for ASCII printing. I agree it is more obvious.
What is a nice ASCII representation for spin up/down? These would be used for printing, but also for construction of spin-orbitals using string macros.
Ideas
Spin-orbitals always have degeneracy unity, so we never need to juxtapose an occupation number after the orbital string.
Non-relativistic spin-orbitals
For non-relativistic spin-orbitals we have the quantum numbers
n
,ell
,m_ell
,s=1/2
, andm_s
.2p
w/m_ell=0
& spin up^
v
2p0^
+
-
2p0+
a
b
2p0a
α
&β
used in Unicode representationRelativistic spin-orbitals
For relativistic orbitals, we instead have the quantum numbers
n
,ell
,j = ell ± 1/2
, andm_j
. We already denotej = ell - 1/2
by minus (-
) andj = ell + 1/2
by silence. How to tackm_j
onto this?I think the least ambiguous is
n ell [-] (m_j)
, e.g.2p-(-1/2)
2p(-1/2)
(without the parentheses, the minus could be inferred to meanj = ell - 1/2
.Originally posted by @jagot in https://github.com/JuliaAtoms/AtomicLevels.jl/pull/55#issuecomment-534418416