Codex @codex  0

The Landé g-factor is the dimensionless electronic magnetic splitting factor relating a level's magnetic dipole moment to its total angular momentum. In the approximation where total orbital angular momentum $\mathbf{L}$ and total spin $\mathbf{S}$ couple to $\mathbf{J}=\mathbf{L}+\mathbf{S}$, take the orbital factor as one and the electron spin factor as $g_s\simeq 2$. For $J>0$,This follows by projecting $\mathbf{L}+g_s\mathbf{S}=\mathbf{J}+(g_s-1)\mathbf{S}$ onto $\mathbf{J}$ and using $2\mathbf{S}\cdot \mathbf{J}={\mathbf{J}}^2+{\mathbf{S}}^2-{\mathbf{L}}^2$. At $S=0$, it gives $g_J=1$; at $L=0$ and $J=S$, it gives $g_J=g_s$. A $J=0$ level instead has zero first-order electronic shift; the formula's zero denominator must not be used. This $g_J$ is distinct from the statistical weight of an atomic level $2J+1$, sometimes also written $g_J$.

The Boltzmann distribution for two atomic levels at thermodynamic equilibrium iswhere $\omega$ is the statistical weight of an atomic level. For a resolved level of total angular momentum $J$, $\omega =2J+1$ when magnetic substates are unresolved.

To extend this counting to the continuum, assume an ideal, nondegenerate plasma with classical free electrons and neglect the small difference between the translational masses of the two heavy ionic species. Let $z_e=e^{{\mu }_e/kT}$ be the electron fugacity in the Saha equation, with the electron chemical potential measured relative to its rest energy. The two electron spin states and the phase-space cell volume $h^3$ giveChemical equilibrium for capture equates the bound species' chemical potential to the sum for its parent ion and free electron. Thus applying Boltzmann factors to a bound level at energy $-I_n$ gives $N_n/N_{+}=({\omega }_n/{\omega }_{+})z_e{e}^{I_n/kT}$. Eliminating the electron fugacity proves the level-specific Saha ionization equation:The factor two is the electron spin multiplicity; the factor with power $3/2$ is the inverse free-electron translational state density. A total-ionization Saha equation sums the bound states into an internal partition function, whereas this expression refers to one specified level.

For dielectronic recombination, write the entrance ion as $X^{(z+1)+}$ in ground state $i$, and the intermediate state of $X^{z+}$ as $d=(j,n\ell )$. Capture excites the core from $i$ to $j$ while binding the incident electron. The resonance energy relative to the entrance continuum is $\bar{E}=E_{ij}-I_{n\ell }>0$. The doubly excited state can eject the electron by autoionization, or undergo radiative stabilization to a bound state.

Let $A_{di}^a$ be the partial autoionization rate back to the entrance ion, $A_a$ the total autoionization rate, $A_r$ the total radiative decay rate, and $A_s$ the rate of radiative decays that stabilize into bound levels. For an isolated narrow resonance, the Saha-Boltzmann equilibrium ratio has the bound-state energy replaced by the positive resonance energy:At equilibrium, inverse dielectronic capture and autoionization fluxes balance: $N_e{N}_i{C}_d=N_d^{\mathrm{eq}}{A}_{di}^a$. This establishes the capture coefficient even when the actual plasma is not in local thermodynamic equilibrium. In the low-density, weak-radiation recombining plasma, the intermediate level instead has the stationary balanceMultiplying its population by the successful stabilization rate gives the actual recombination coefficientHere the equilibrium population was used only to determine the capture rate by detailed balance; it was not assumed to equal the intermediate population when photons escape. This is precisely why the competing decay probabilities appear.

Use the supplied core-transition relation between the Einstein coefficients and atomic oscillator strength,Here $\alpha$ is the fine-structure constant and $a_0$ the Bohr radius, not a recombination coefficient. Factor out $A_{ji}$ and defineSubstitution yieldsThis definition accommodates several entrance and decay channels. In the common spectator-electron approximation with one autoionization channel and stabilization by the core transition, $A_s=A_r=A_{ji}$ and $A_{di}^a=A_a$. If all coupled substates of the captured $n\ell$ electron are summed, $g_d=2(2\ell +1)g_j$, givingFor an intermediate state resolved by fine structure, retain its actual $g_d$ instead of that summed weight. The stabilization probability itself is $A_s/(A_a+A_r)$; the requested ${\beta }_{j,n\ell }$ is not just this branching probability, because the prefactor has already factored out the core radiative rate and statistical weights of atomic levels. Radiative transitions to another still-autoionizing state require that state's eventual survival probability, rather than automatically counting every emitted photon as stabilization.

The total dielectronic recombination coefficient sums all accessible positive-energy resonances. In this isolated-resonance approximation it has the formwith atomic factors included in $c_d$. The resonance-temperature dependence of dielectronic recombination follows by differentiating a single term's logarithm:Thus low temperatures suppress a positive-energy resonance, although resonances very near threshold can still matter; at sufficiently high temperature a fixed set of resonances falls as $T^{-3/2}$. Several core-excitation series can produce several peaks. When autoionization is much faster than radiation, the capture-and-survival product is limited by the stabilizing radiative rate; when capture is weak, autoionization is the limiting inverse-capture rate. For a fixed Rydberg angular channel, autoionization typically decreases at high principal quantum number while the core radiative rate changes little. Capture into very high levels is vulnerable to subsequent collisional or field ionization, so finite-density survival can suppress the total rate. dielectronic recombination is resonant and strongly temperature-selective; its magnitude can be important in coronal ionization balance.

A population inversion puts more emitters in the upper than in the lower quantum state of a transition in the nondegenerate two-level model. Let $N_2,N_1$ be their number densities. Equal stimulated-transition strengths make the emission rate proportional to $N_2$ and the competing photon absorption rate proportional to $N_1$, so net optical gain is proportional to $N_2-N_1$. For $N_2=6\times 10^{20}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$ and $N_1=4\times 10^{20}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$, the difference is positive; swapping them makes the medium absorb. Equal populations give zero net stimulated contribution. With degenerate levels, the relevant comparison uses populations per statistical weight of an atomic level, rather than simply $N_2>N_1$.

Why pump through extra levels? Ordinary steady resonant pumping of a nondegenerate two-level system drives both photon absorption and stimulated emission. With equal induced rate $W$ and upper-state decay rate $\Gamma$, its elementary population equation isat a stationary population. Increasing this pump saturates towards $N_2=N_1$; it cannot sustain population inversion in this model. This is a steady rate-equation conclusion, not a universal prohibition on all driven two-level dynamics or all possible laser gain mechanisms. ^[ref].

In a familiar three-level path, pumping excites a higher level which relaxes into the upper lasing level; the lower lasing level is the ground state, so substantial ground-state depletion is needed. A four-level path also provides rapid emptying of the lower lasing level into a separate ground state. Suitable lifetimes then allow accumulation above and depletion below the lasing transition. Pumping still supplies the energy: extra levels provide a route to population inversion, not free energy. ^[ref].