Spin-weighted spherical harmonics as massless angular momentum eigenstates and their role in obstructing spin-orbital decompositions

Eric Palmerduca; Hong Qin

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Spin-weighted spherical harmonics as massless angular momentum eigenstates and their role in obstructing spin-orbital decompositions

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For a massless particle of helicity h, the angular momentum eigenstates are the spin-weighted spherical harmonics $-hY_{jm}$, one multiplet for each $j \ge |h|$.

desk verdict The central identification is right, but the printed eigenstate formula has the wrong spin-weight sign and does not solve the paper's own equations; it is fixable and still deserves peer review. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.12765 v2 pith:TNWJU2AO submitted 2025-05-19 math-ph hep-thmath.MP

Eric Palmerduca , Hong Qin This is my paper · ORCID

classification math-phhep-thmath.MP MSC 81R0581R20

keywords spin-weightedsphericalharmonicsmasslessparticleshelicityangularmomentumeigenstatesvectorbundlesspin-orbitaldecompositionphotontopologySO(3)multiplets

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper establishes that for a massless particle of fixed helicity $h$, the angular momentum eigenstates in momentum space are the spin-weighted spherical harmonics $-hY_{jm}$, taken as sections of a nontrivial line bundle rather than as ordinary functions. In the right frame these states are simultaneous eigenstates of energy, helicity, $J^2$, and $J_z$, and they are globally smooth even where the coordinate expression looks singular. The resulting spectrum has exactly one multiplet for each total angular momentum $j \ge |h|$ and none below it, so helicity acts as a lower bound on $j$. This sparse multiplet structure is incompatible with any decomposition of $J$ into independent spin and orbital parts, giving a concrete illustration of the no-go result that massless particles have no spin-orbital splitting.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing structure is the vector bundle $\gamma_h$, defined as the $|h|$-fold tensor product of the right- or left-handed photon line bundles $\gamma_\pm$, whose sections are identified with spin-weight $-h$ functions. In the frame $e_h$ (tensor products of $e_\pm=(e_\theta\pm i e_\phi)/\sqrt{2}$), the angular momentum operators $J'_z$, $J'_\pm$, and $J'^2$ act on coefficient functions by explicit differential operators; solving $J'^2 f=j(j+1)f$ and $J'_z f=m f$ gives exactly the spin-weighted spherical harmonics $-hY_{jm}$. These harmonics are the central objects, and their section interpretation is what makes the pole limits in Eqs. (4.31)-(4.32) well-defined.

What would settle it

Prepare or simulate a monochromatic free-photon state with total angular momentum quantum number $j=0$; the paper's predicted spectrum for helicity $\pm1$ contains no such state, so a genuine $j=0$ photon mode would refute the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the angular part of the single-particle Hilbert space for a massless helicity $h$ boson, $L^2(\gamma_h,S^2)$, decomposes as $\bigoplus_{j=|h|}^\infty V_j$, with $V_j$ spanned by the sections $-hY_{jm}e_h$, $m=-j,\ldots,j$. Writing the total angular momentum operators in the frame $e_h$ built from tensor products of the spherical polarization vectors turns their eigenvalue problem into the defining equations of the spin-weighted spherical harmonics of spin-weight $-h$. This identifies the SWSHs as the angular momentum eigenstates of massless particles, explains their pole singularities as artifacts of the frame, and yields a countable globally smooth basis for monochromatic waves. The paper further argues that the one-multiplet-per-$j$ spectrum, with $|h|$ as a minimum $j$, cannot arise from adding an orbital angular momentum representation to an internal spin representation, since such tensor products necessarily produce repeated multiplets or low-$j$ states.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that the single-particle state space of a massless helicity $h$ particle is exactly the $|h|$-fold tensor product of the photon line bundle, an identification established in earlier work; if that bundle description is not the right one, the SWSH eigenstate identification fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For photons ($h=\pm1$), the angular momentum spectrum consists of one multiplet for each $j\ge1$, so no $j=0$ photon angular momentum state exists.
The basis $-hY_{jm}e_h$ is countable and globally smooth, unlike the momentum-eigenstate basis, whose polar singularities are unavoidable for $h\neq0$.
A complete set of commuting observables for a massless particle is $(H,\chi,J^2,J_z)$; a state is labeled by $|k_0|,h,j,m$, with no independent orbital label.
The one-multiplet-per-$j$ spectrum cannot be produced by a tensor product of orbital and spin representations, so any spin-orbital decomposition of massless $J$ is untenable.
The helicity $|h|$ is a strict lower bound on $j$, unlike the massive case where $j=0$ states always exist.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A direct numerical test would be to expand known electromagnetic multipole fields in the $\mp1Y_{jm}$ basis and check that the coefficients reproduce standard radiation patterns; a mismatch would signal that the SWSH basis is not complete for physical photon states.
The same bundle logic applied to helicity $\pm2$ fields predicts graviton angular momentum eigenstates are spin-weight $\mp2$ harmonics with $j\ge2$, giving an angular momentum spectrum that could be compared with gravitational wave mode decompositions.
Because the SWSH basis is countable and smooth, it offers a natural finite-$j$ truncation for monochromatic massless wave simulations, though the paper itself does not discuss numerical efficacy.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things about 2505.12765. The central identification is right: in the e_h frame, massless helicity h angular momentum eigenstates are the spin-weight -h SWSHs. That is a genuine, useful result—it gives an explicit smooth countable basis for monochromatic massless waves, which the momentum basis lacks, and it makes the topological obstruction concrete. But the printed explicit formula (4.59)-(4.60), labeled hY_jm, is actually the standard spin-weight +h harmonic, so it does not solve the paper's own equations (4.56). For h=1, j=m=1 it gives -sin^2(theta/2)e^{i phi}, which J'_+ does not annihilate; replacing h by -h gives the correct -hY_jm and does satisfy the multiplet equations. There is also a sign typo in J^2: (4.52) has +∇^2 where (4.55) has -∇^2, and (4.55) is the correct one. These are not cosmetic; they occur in the central displayed construction, but they are fixable and they do not destroy the validity of the main claim.

What the paper does well: the derivation from the vector bundle representation is parameter-free and self-contained once you accept Eq. (2.6), and it is honest about leaning on Ref. [21] for that bundle construction. The multiplet-structure obstruction argument in Sec. 5 is clean and is a good concrete illustration of the earlier no-go theorem; it is not a replacement for that theorem, and the paper does not pretend it is. The connection to Dray's inverse construction is acknowledged.

Soft spots: beyond the sign errors, the 'direct calculation' steps (4.37)-(4.51) are asserted rather than shown, which is likely how the sign errors slipped in. The identification of sections of gamma_h with spin-weight -h functions is stated rather than derived; a reader new to their framework will have to go to prior work. Neither of these is fatal.

Bottom line: this paper is for people working on photon/graviton angular momentum, spin-weighted harmonics, or the SAM/OAM controversy. It deserves a serious referee; the main result is correct and worth publishing, but the referee should require the signs to be fixed and a few of the omitted steps filled in. I would bring it to a reading group and, after correction, would cite it.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper works in a vector-bundle description of massless helicity-h particles, reviews the identification of sections of the bundle γ_h with spin-weight −h functions in Secs. 2–3, and derives the angular momentum operators J_z, J_±, and J^2 in the local frame e_h in Sec. 4. It claims that the simultaneous eigenstates are the spin-weighted spherical harmonics of spin-weight −h, yielding a countable basis for monochromatic waves and a multiplet decomposition L^2(γ_{h,S^2}) ≅ ⊕_{j=|h|}^∞ V_j. Section 5 uses the resulting sparse multiplet structure to illustrate the authors' earlier no-go theorem against spin-orbital decompositions for massless particles.

Significance. If the derivation is correct, the paper gives a clean physical interpretation of spin-weighted spherical harmonics as total-angular-momentum eigenstates of massless particles, provides an explicit countable orthonormal basis that is globally smooth despite the nontrivial bundle topology, and connects the topology of the photon and graviton line bundles to the observable multiplet structure. The central derivation is self-contained from the bundle representation and does not fit parameters. The no-go conclusion is not newly proved here, but the paper gives a concrete and physically transparent illustration and correctly defers the rigorous proof to Ref. [25].

major comments (2)

[Sec. 4.2, Eqs. (4.52) and (4.55)] There is a sign inconsistency between the two displayed forms of J'^2. With the standard Laplace–Beltrami operator one has L^2 f = −∇^2 f, so the leading term in Eq. (4.52) should be −∇^2 f, exactly as written in Eq. (4.55). As printed, Eq. (4.52) would lead to the wrong eigenvalue equation. Please correct Eq. (4.52) or state the sign convention for ∇^2 explicitly so that the two equations agree.
[Sec. 4.2, Eqs. (4.57)–(4.60)] The explicit formula in Eqs. (4.59)–(4.60) is the spin-weight +h harmonic _hY_jm, not the spin-weight −h harmonic required by Eq. (4.57). For h=1, j=m=1, Eq. (4.59) gives a function proportional to sin²(θ/2)e^{iφ}; applying J'_+ from Eq. (4.54) to this function gives a nonzero result, so it is not the highest-weight state of the j=1 multiplet and does not satisfy Eq. (4.56b). Replacing h by −h in Eqs. (4.59)–(4.60) produces _-1Y_11 ∝ cos²(θ/2)e^{iφ}, which is annihilated by J'_+ and satisfies the multiplet equations. The displayed solution therefore does not solve the displayed eigenvalue equations as written.

minor comments (4)

[Sec. 4.1, Eq. (4.42)] The right-hand side of Eq. (4.42) appears to contain an extraneous factor 'i' before e_±; please check and correct the typographical error.
[Sec. 4.2, Eqs. (4.37)–(4.51)] The 'direct calculation' leading to Eqs. (4.37)–(4.51) is quite compressed. Adding a few intermediate steps, especially for Eqs. (4.49)–(4.51), would make the derivation substantially easier to verify.
[Sec. 4.1, text after Eq. (4.4)] There is a typo in the name 'Neinhius'; this should read 'Nienhuis'.
[Sec. 5, first paragraph] The statement that the sparse multiplet structure rules out 'any reasonable' spin-orbital decomposition is heuristic; since the rigorous no-go proof is already contained in Ref. [25], please make explicit that Sec. 5 is intended as an illustration rather than an independent proof.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the SWSH eigenstate identification is a genuine calculation from the stated bundle representation and standard SWSH mathematics.

full rationale

The derivation of the angular momentum eigenstates is not circular. Section 4 starts from the bundle representation γ_h=γ_±^{⊗|h|} (Eq. 2.6), which is a cited theorem from the authors' prior work rather than a definition of the target result, and constructs the operators J'_z=-i∂_φ, J'_±=e^{±iφ}(±∂_θ+i cotθ ∂_φ+h/sinθ), and J'^2=-∇^2-(2h cosθ/sin^2θ)L_z+h^2/sin^2θ (Eqs. 4.53-4.55) from the physical definition of J. The identification of the eigenfunctions with spin-weight -h SWSHs (Eq. 4.57) is an external mathematical fact (Newman-Penrose; Goldberg et al.; Dray), and the completeness used in Eq. 4.61 is likewise cited to Newman and Penrose. No parameter is fitted to the claimed eigenstates, and no eigenvalue equation is solved by inserting the answer as an assumption. The self-citations to Refs. [21], [25], and [26] provide the bundle model and the SAM-OAM no-go theorem; these are prior published theorems, not restatements of the present result, and the paper's own multiplet-structure argument would stand or fall independently of those citations. The apparent sign inconsistency in the explicit SWSH formula (Eqs. 4.59-4.60) would be a mathematical error in the printed solution if confirmed, but an internal sign error is a correctness issue, not a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no free parameters or invented physical entities. Its central claim rests on the prior vector bundle representation of massless particles (including the tensor product construction of γ_h) and on standard mathematical results about spin-weighted spherical harmonics. These are cited from the authors' own published work and from the literature.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Massless particle bundles of arbitrary helicity h are constructed as tensor products of |h| copies of the photon line bundle with the appropriate sign: γ_h = γ_±^{⊗|h|} (Eq. 2.6).
This is a result taken from the authors' prior work (Ref. [21]) and is not re-derived here; the entire spin-weight -h description of massless states (Sec. 3) rests on this identification.
domain assumption Sections of γ_h are equivalent to spin-weight -h functions on the sphere (Sec. 3).
This equivalence is derived in the paper from the bundle structure, but it depends on the topological description of the bundle and the choice of a local trivialization; it is fundamental to the statement that the eigenstates are SWSHs.
standard math The spin-weighted spherical harmonics form a complete orthonormal basis for the space of spin-weight s functions.
Completed by Newman and Penrose [30], cited in Eq. (4.61)-(4.62); the paper relies on this to assert that Eq. (4.61) is an expansion of any section.
standard math The angular momentum operators are generated by the SO(3) action on the Hilbert space L^2(γ_h) defined in Eq. (2.12).
This is the standard definition of total angular momentum as the generator of rotations, applied to the bundle representation.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spin-weighted spherical harmonics as massless angular momentum eigenstates and their role in obstructing spin-orbital decompositions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TNWJU2AO

@misc{pith2026250512765,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spin-weighted spherical harmonics as massless angular momentum eigenstates and their role in obstructing spin-orbital decompositions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TNWJU2AO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.12765}
}

abstract

We show that for massless helicity $h$ particles, the angular momentum eigenstates are given in an appropriate coordinate system by the spin-weighted spherical harmonics ${_{-h}Y_{jm}}$ of spin-weight $-h$. In particular, these are simultaneous eigenstates of the Hamiltonian, helicity, $J^2$, and $J_z$. The appearance of the spin-weighted spherical harmonics as opposed to the ordinary spherical harmonics reflects the nontrivial topological structure of massless particles with nonzero helicity. The resultant angular momentum multiplet structure is quite different than that of massive particles, with at most one multiplet for each angular momentum $j$ and with $|h|$ acting as a lower bound on $j$. This illustrates the obstruction to a spin-orbital decomposition of the angular momentum for massless particles, as such a sparse multiplet structure is not consistent with any reasonable spin-orbital splitting.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

The topology, geometry, and angular momentum of cold plasma waves
physics.plasm-ph 2025-06 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Cold unmagnetized plasma waves carry the same nontrivial R/L topology as photons, their angular momentum eigenstates are spin-weighted spherical harmonics, and no true spin-orbital decomposition of the angular momentu...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[21]

Palmerduca and H

E. Palmerduca and H. Qin, Helicity is a topological invariant of massless particles: C =−2h, Phys. Rev. Res. 7 (2025) L022001

work page 2025
[25]

Palmerduca and H

E. Palmerduca and H. Qin, Four no-go theorems on the existence of spin and orbital angular momentum of massless bosons , SciPost Phys. 18 (2025) 188

work page 2025
[1]

Kane and E.J

C.L. Kane and E.J. Mele, Quantum spin hall effect in graphene , Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 226801

work page 2005
[2]

Hasan and C.L

M.Z. Hasan and C.L. Kane, Colloquium: Topological insulators, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82 (2010) 3045

work page 2010
[3]

Souslov, B.C

A. Souslov, B.C. Van Zuiden, D. Bartolo and V. Vitelli, Topological sound in active-liquid metamaterials, Nat. Phys. 13 (2017) 1091

work page 2017
[4]

Delplace, J.B

P. Delplace, J.B. Marston and A. Venaille, Topological origin of equatorial waves , Science 358 (2017) 1075. – 17 –

work page 2017
[5]

Tauber, P

C. Tauber, P. Delplace and A. Venaille, A bulk-interface correspondence for equatorial waves , J. Fluid Mech. 868 (2019) R2

work page 2019
[6]

Souslov, K

A. Souslov, K. Dasbiswas, M. Fruchart, S. Vaikuntanathan and V. Vitelli, Topological Waves in Fluids with Odd Viscosity , Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 128001

work page 2019

Show all 69 references

[7]

Perrot, P

M. Perrot, P. Delplace and A. Venaille, Topological transition in stratified fluids, Nat. Phys. 15 (2019) 781

2019
[8]

Parker, Topological phase in plasma physics , J

J.B. Parker, Topological phase in plasma physics , J. Plasma Phys. 87 (2021) 835870202

2021
[9]

Faure, Manifestation of the topological index formula in quantum waves and geophysical waves, Ann

F. Faure, Manifestation of the topological index formula in quantum waves and geophysical waves, Ann. Henri Lebesgue 6 (2023) 449

2023
[10]

B. Yang, M. Lawrence, W. Gao, Q. Guo and S. Zhang, One-way helical electromagnetic wave propagation supported by magnetized plasma , Sci. Rep. 6 (2016) 21461

2016
[11]

W. Gao, B. Yang, M. Lawrence, F. Fang, B. B´ eri and S. Zhang, Photonic Weyl degeneracies in magnetized plasma , Nat. Commun. 7 (2016) 12435

2016
[12]

Parker, J.B

J.B. Parker, J.B. Marston, S.M. Tobias and Z. Zhu, Topological gaseous plasmon polariton in realistic plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020) 195001

2020
[13]

Parker, J.W

J.B. Parker, J.W. Burby, J.B. Marston and S.M. Tobias, Nontrivial topology in the continuous spectrum of a magnetized plasma , Phys. Rev. Res. 2 (2020) 33425

2020
[14]

Fu and H

Y. Fu and H. Qin, Topological phases and bulk-edge correspondence of magnetized cold plasmas, Nat. Commun. 12 (2021) 3924

2021
[15]

Fu and H

Y. Fu and H. Qin, The dispersion and propagation of topological Langmuir-cyclotron waves in cold magnetized plasmas , J. Plasma Phys. 88 (2022) 835880401

2022
[16]

Qin and Y

H. Qin and Y. Fu, Topological Langmuir-cyclotron wave, Sci. Adv. 9 (2023) eadd8041

2023
[17]

Qin and E

H. Qin and E. Palmerduca, Oblique photons, plasmons, and current-plasmons in relativistic plasmas and their topological implications , 2024. 10.48550/arXiv.2404.05636

2024 doi arXiv
[18]

Fu and H

Y. Fu and H. Qin, Topological modes and spectral flows in inhomogeneous pt-symmetric continuous media, Phys. Rev. Res. 6 (2024) 023273

2024
[19]

Palmerduca and H

E. Palmerduca and H. Qin, Photon topology, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 085005

2024
[20]

Palmerduca and H

E. Palmerduca and H. Qin, Graviton topology, JHEP 2024 (2024) 150

2024
[22]

Tu, Differential Geometry: Connections, Curvature, and Characteristic Classes , Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017)

L.W. Tu, Differential Geometry: Connections, Curvature, and Characteristic Classes , Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017)

2017
[23]

Quantum field theory

D. Tong, “Quantum field theory.” unpublished, 2006

2006
[24]

Woit, Quantum Theory, Groups and Representations: An Introduction , Springer, New York (11, 2017)

P. Woit, Quantum Theory, Groups and Representations: An Introduction , Springer, New York (11, 2017)

2017
[26]

Palmerduca and H

E. Palmerduca and H. Qin, Zero curvature is a necessary and sufficient condition for a spin-orbital decomposition, Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 125018. – 18 –

2025
[27]

van Enk and G

S.J. van Enk and G. Nienhuis, Spin and orbital angular momentum of photons , EPL 25 (1994) 497

1994
[28]

Enk and G.N

S.V. Enk and G.N. and, Commutation rules and eigenvalues of spin and orbital angular momentum of radiation fields , J. Mod. Opt. 41 (1994) 963

1994
[29]

Dragon, Bundle structure of massless unitary representations of the poincar´ e group, Int

N. Dragon, Bundle structure of massless unitary representations of the poincar´ e group, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 63 (2024) 149

2024
[30]

Newman and R

E.T. Newman and R. Penrose, Note on the Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Group , J. Math. Phys. 7 (1966) 863

1966
[31]

Wu and C.N

T.T. Wu and C.N. Yang, Concept of nonintegrable phase factors and global formulation of gauge fields, Phys. Rev. D 12 (1975) 3845

1975
[32]

Wu and C.N

T.T. Wu and C.N. Yang, Dirac monopole without strings: Monopole harmonics , Nucl. Phys. B 107 (1976) 365

1976
[33]

Dray, The relationship between monopole harmonics and spin-weighted spherical harmonics, J

T. Dray, The relationship between monopole harmonics and spin-weighted spherical harmonics, J. Math. Phys. 26 (1985) 1030

1985
[34]

Fakhri, A

H. Fakhri, A. Dehghani and A. Jafari, New ladder operators for the monopole harmonics , J. Math. Phys. 48 (2007) 023510

2007
[35]

Curtis and D.E

W.D. Curtis and D.E. Lerner, Complex line bundles in relativity , J. Math. Phys. 19 (1978) 874

1978
[36]

Michel and K

V. Michel and K. Seibert, A mathematical view on spin-weighted spherical harmonics and their applications in geodesy , in Mathematical Geodesy, W. Freeden, ed., (Berlin, Germany), pp. 195–307, Springer Spektrum Berlin (2020), DOI

2020
[37]

S. Yi, D. Kim, J. Na, X. Tong and M.H. Kim, Spin-weighted spherical harmonics for polarized light transport, ACM Trans. Graph. 43 (2024) 127

2024
[38]

Zaldarriaga and U

M. Zaldarriaga and U. Seljak, All-sky analysis of polarization in the microwave background , Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 1830

1997
[39]

Ng and G.-C

K.-W. Ng and G.-C. Liu, Correlation functions of cmb anisotropy and polarization , Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 08 (1999) 61

1999
[40]

Wiaux, L

Y. Wiaux, L. Jacques, P. Vielva and P. Vandergheynst, Fast directional correlation on the sphere with steerable filters , Astrophys. J. 652 (2006) 820

2006
[41]

Thorne, Multipole expansions of gravitational radiation , Rev

K.S. Thorne, Multipole expansions of gravitational radiation , Rev. Mod. Phys. 52 (1980) 299

1980
[42]

Torres del Castillo, Spin-weighted spherical harmonics and their applications , Rev

G. Torres del Castillo, Spin-weighted spherical harmonics and their applications , Rev. Mex. F´ ıs.53 (2007) 159

2007
[43]

Mandrilli, J.I

P.A. Mandrilli, J.I. Nieva and G.D. Quiroga, Correspondence between tensorial spin-s and spin-weighted spherical harmonics, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 52 (2020) 58

2020
[44]

Terno, Two roles of relativistic spin operators , Phys

D.R. Terno, Two roles of relativistic spin operators , Phys. Rev. A 67 (2003) 014102

2003
[45]

Akhiezer and V

A. Akhiezer and V. Berestetskii, Quantum Electrodynamics, Interscience monographs and texts in physics and astronomy, v. 11, Interscience Publishers, New York (1965)

1965
[46]

Jaffe and A

R. Jaffe and A. Manohar, The g1 problem: Deep inelastic electron scattering and the spin of the proton, Nucl. Phys. B 337 (1990) 509. – 19 –

1990
[47]

Chen, X.-F

X.-S. Chen, X.-F. L¨ u, W.-M. Sun, F. Wang and T. Goldman, Spin and orbital angular momentum in gauge theories: Nucleon spin structure and multipole radiation revisited , Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 232002

2008
[48]

Wakamatsu, Gauge-invariant decomposition of nucleon spin , Phys

M. Wakamatsu, Gauge-invariant decomposition of nucleon spin , Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 114010

2010
[49]

Bialynicki-Birula and Z

I. Bialynicki-Birula and Z. Bialynicka-Birula, Canonical separation of angular momentum of light into its orbital and spin parts , J. Opt. 13 (2011) 064014

2011
[50]

Leader, The angular momentum controversy: What’s it all about and does it matter? , Phys

E. Leader, The angular momentum controversy: What’s it all about and does it matter? , Phys. Part. Nucl. 44 (2013) 926

2013
[51]

Leader and C

E. Leader and C. Lorc´ e,The angular momentum controversy: What’s it all about and does it matter?, Phys. Rep. 541 (2014) 163

2014
[52]

Leader, The photon angular momentum controversy: Resolution of a conflict between laser optics and particle physics , Phys

E. Leader, The photon angular momentum controversy: Resolution of a conflict between laser optics and particle physics , Phys. Lett. B 756 (2016) 303

2016
[53]

The angular momentum controversy: What’s it all about and does it matter?

E. Leader and C. Lorc´ e,Corrigendum to “The angular momentum controversy: What’s it all about and does it matter?” , Phys. Rep. 802 (2019) 23

2019
[54]

L.-P. Yang, F. Khosravi and Z. Jacob, Quantum field theory for spin operator of the photon , Phys. Rev. Res. 4 (2022) 023165

2022
[55]

Das, L.-P

P. Das, L.-P. Yang and Z. Jacob, What are the quantum commutation relations for the total angular momentum of light? tutorial , J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 41 (2024) 1764

2024
[56]

Berestetskii, E

V. Berestetskii, E. Lifshitz and L. Pitaevskii, Quantum Electrodynamics, vol. 4, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2nd ed. (1982)

1982
[57]

Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, Wiley, New York, 3rd ed

J.D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, Wiley, New York, 3rd ed. (1999)

1999
[58]

Weinberg, The Quantfum Theory of Fields , vol

S. Weinberg, The Quantfum Theory of Fields , vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995), 10.1017/CBO9781139644167

1995 doi
[59]

Maggiore, A Modern Introduction to Quantum Field Theory , Oxford master series in statistical, computational, and theoretical physics, Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)

M. Maggiore, A Modern Introduction to Quantum Field Theory , Oxford master series in statistical, computational, and theoretical physics, Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)

2005
[60]

Wigner, On unitary representations of the inhomogeneous lorentz group , Ann

E. Wigner, On unitary representations of the inhomogeneous lorentz group , Ann. Math. 40 (1939) 149

1939
[61]

Asorey, L.J

M. Asorey, L.J. Boya and J.F. Cari˜ nena,Covariant representations in a fibre bundle framework, Reps. Math. Phys. 21 (1985) 391

1985
[62]

Goldberg, A.J

J.N. Goldberg, A.J. Macfarlane, E.T. Newman, F. Rohrlich and E.C.G. Sudarshan, Spin-s Spherical Harmonics and ð, J. Math. Phys. 8 (1967) 2155

1967
[63]

Boyle, How should spin-weighted spherical functions be defined? , J

M. Boyle, How should spin-weighted spherical functions be defined? , J. Math. Phys. 57 (2016) 092504

2016
[64]

Reed and B

M. Reed and B. Simon, Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics II: Fourier Analysis, Self-Adjointness, Academic Press, San Diego (1975)

1975
[65]

Hall, Quantum Theory for Mathematicians , Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer, New York (2013)

B.C. Hall, Quantum Theory for Mathematicians , Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer, New York (2013)

2013
[66]

Zettili, Quantum Mechanics: Concepts and Applications , John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 2nd ed

N. Zettili, Quantum Mechanics: Concepts and Applications , John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 2nd ed. (2009). – 20 –

2009
[67]

Eastwood and P

M. Eastwood and P. Tod, Edth-a differential operator on the sphere , Math. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 92 (1982) 317

1982
[68]

Bliokh, M.A

K.Y. Bliokh, M.A. Alonso, E.A. Ostrovskaya and A. Aiello, Angular momenta and spin-orbit interaction of nonparaxial light in free space , Phys. Rev. A 82 (2010) 063825

2010
[69]

Shankar, Principles of Quantum Mechanics , Springer, New York, 2nd ed

R. Shankar, Principles of Quantum Mechanics , Springer, New York, 2nd ed. (1994), https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-0576-8. – 21 –

1994 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [21]

Palmerduca and H

E. Palmerduca and H. Qin, Helicity is a topological invariant of massless particles: C =−2h, Phys. Rev. Res. 7 (2025) L022001

work page 2025

[2] [25]

Palmerduca and H

E. Palmerduca and H. Qin, Four no-go theorems on the existence of spin and orbital angular momentum of massless bosons , SciPost Phys. 18 (2025) 188

work page 2025

[3] [1]

Kane and E.J

C.L. Kane and E.J. Mele, Quantum spin hall effect in graphene , Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 226801

work page 2005

[4] [2]

Hasan and C.L

M.Z. Hasan and C.L. Kane, Colloquium: Topological insulators, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82 (2010) 3045

work page 2010

[5] [3]

Souslov, B.C

A. Souslov, B.C. Van Zuiden, D. Bartolo and V. Vitelli, Topological sound in active-liquid metamaterials, Nat. Phys. 13 (2017) 1091

work page 2017

[6] [4]

Delplace, J.B

P. Delplace, J.B. Marston and A. Venaille, Topological origin of equatorial waves , Science 358 (2017) 1075. – 17 –

work page 2017

[7] [5]

Tauber, P

C. Tauber, P. Delplace and A. Venaille, A bulk-interface correspondence for equatorial waves , J. Fluid Mech. 868 (2019) R2

work page 2019

[8] [6]

Souslov, K

A. Souslov, K. Dasbiswas, M. Fruchart, S. Vaikuntanathan and V. Vitelli, Topological Waves in Fluids with Odd Viscosity , Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 128001

work page 2019