Hydrogen anion stable when left unperturbed ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter xortdsc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hydrogen Stable
AI Thread Summary
An isolated singly negatively ionized hydrogen atom (H−) is stable when both electrons occupy the 1s orbital, as strong correlations between the electrons maintain this bound state. The lack of bound excited states means that if H− absorbs a photon, it will likely lose one electron, resulting in ionization. This stability is contingent on the absence of external radiation, which would otherwise disturb the electron configuration. The findings confirm that H− can remain stable under specific conditions. Overall, H− demonstrates unique properties in its electron interactions and stability.
xortdsc
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I wondered if an isolated singly negatively ionized hydrogen atom (1 proton, 2 electrons) would be stable.
In the corresponding wikipedia article it states: "H− is unusual because, in its free form, it has no bound excited states, as was finally proven in 1977 (Hill 1977)." - does this mean it would loose one of its electrons (and by that its ionization) as soon as it absorbs a photon, but when both electrons remain in their ground state (1s orbital) due to lack of external radiation they would remain in a stable bound state ?

cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ah, I was to quick with my question. I've found a source which is more explicit with its statement saying: "Correlations between the two electrons are strong already in the ground state, the only bound state in this three-body system."

So it seems it is stable when both electrons are on the 1s orbital.
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top