Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Since strings are extended objects, is all angular momentum in string theory essentially "orbital" angular momentum? Or is there still a kind of intrinsic angular momentum assigned to a string?

Either way, is there anything that prevents the "intrinsic spin" of a particle represented by a string from being arbitrarily large?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 3 down vote accepted

The orbital momentum of a string may be arbitrarily large. Whether it should be called "orbital" or "intrinsic" depends on the perspective. The right answer is the formula, such as $$J_{ij} = \int d\sigma [x_i (\sigma) p_j (\sigma) - p_i(\sigma) x_j(\sigma) + \gamma_{ij}^{ab} \theta_a(\sigma) \theta_b(\sigma)]$$ I added some superstring term, too. The $xp$ terms may be viewed as a density of the orbital angular momentum on the string; the fermionic term is its most direct fermionic generalization. However, both of these terms, and especially the latter, become "intrinsic angular momentum" when you expand the fields $x,p,\theta$ to Fourier modes and interpret the string as a particle with internal oscillations. In particular, the intrinsic spin-1/2 always comes from the quantization and/or excitations of the fermionic degrees of freedom.

The formula says much more than just some confusing dogmatic word "intrinsic" vs "orbital", at least to a person who wants to understand the terms accurately enough - at the level of maths.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.