<a href="http://mathoverflow.net/questions/80146/is-the-mendeleev-table-explained-in-quantum-mechanics">This question</a> prompts me to ask something more specific about the periodic table.
As far as I know, the main significance of the periodic table is that 

*The elements in the same column have similar chemical properties.*

For example, the noble gases at the far right are all pretty stable on their
own. The explanation for this is that they have (in the neutral state) a full
outermost shell. Now my question is

*Is there an explanation, at some reasonable level of mathematical rigor, of when a new shell 
starts?*

That is, where do the length of the periods

2, 8, 8, 18, 18, 32, 32

come from? I confess I've been puzzled by this ever since my university physics course.

Allow me to pinpoint my confusion a bit more. I understand that there are some numbers that are important
in atomic structure, and these are  2, 6, 10, 14, and so on. This is because of the occurrence of
the representations 

$$V_l\otimes S$$

inside the Hilbert space for a single particle moving in a central potential.
These are the *orbitals* one hears about in physical chemistry courses.  Here, the $V_l$ are the representations of $SO(3)$ of odd-dimension $2l+l$, while
$S$ is the standard two-dim representation of  $SU(2)$.
Since all
the states in a single orbital have the same energy, it is natural that
the breaks will occur  after some collection of orbitals are
all filled.

 Thus, for a hydrogen atom,
the successive shells have dimensions

$2n^2$

for $n=1, 2, 3, \ldots$ because the representations $V_l\otimes S$ for
$l=1, 2,\ldots, n-1$ 
occur each with multiplicity one inside the $n$-th shell.

So if the periods in the table were of lengths

2, 8, 18, 32,

I would have vaguely assumed that the pattern of shells even in general looks like
that of the hydrogen atom. But of course, among the known elements, each period length that
occurs in the hydrogen atom is repeated twice, except for the first one. So a more
precise question is

*Is there a reasonable mathematical explanation of this `multiplicity two' of the
periods?*

The little I recall of  discussions in standard
textbooks were quite unclear. There are various rules by the name of Hund's rule,
the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufbau_principle"> Aufbau  principle</a>, and so on, but I couldn't gather from any of them

*Where the breaks should occur. *

What I do see is that periods end when the orbitals 1p, 2p, 3p, etc. get filled
following the Aufbau principle. (Here, p is the chemist's label for $V_1\otimes S$.)
So perhaps another version
of the question  is

*Is there some reason that the p-orbitals mark the end of the periods?*

To be honest, I've never understood the Aufbau principle either, because I don't know
 the rationale behind the principal quantum number for the larger atoms. That is,
 the number 4 in the orbital 4p refers to the 4-th energy level in the case of
 the hydrogen atom. But for larger nuclei, the $n $ in orbital '$np$' does not refer
 to the energy level. (This discrepancy is in fact implied by the Aufbau principle.) So what is
 the significance of the $n$ in general that enables them to play some role in
 a physical principle?
 
 I realize this question is becoming incoherent already. Nevertheless, I would very much
 appreciate clarification on any sensible version of it at a level of mathematical
 rigor of your choice. (I am not asking for any axiomatics.) Pointers to an accessible reference would be equally welcome.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------

 As with the earlier question, a word of explanation is in order on the decision to post this on
 Math Overflow. I will draw upon an analogy I read long ago in an article of George Mackey's that
 went something like this: Say my mother tongue is Korean. If I would really like
 to use English fluently, it is probably best  eventually to learn from native
 speakers of English. On the other hand, if I would like a *good translation* into
 Korean of English literature, it is better to consult an educated Korean who knows a lot
 about English. Of course answers from real physicists will be very gratefully
 received, especially if they bear in mind that the query comes from someone who
  struggles against a serious language handicap.