Does Binding Energy Explain Mass Changes in Electron-Proton Systems?

  • Thread starter Thread starter K8181
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Mass
K8181
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
I have a fundamental question. I am reading this modern physics book, and it says that an electron and a proton that are released and come together into a bound state release a photon. Fine. But the explanation given is that the sum of the individual masses of the proton and electron is greater than the mass of the bound system, and that the extra rest mass was converted to energy in the release of the photon. I am confused because it seems that an equally good explanation is that the electron and proton have a potential energy when they are apart, and it is this energy that is released as a photon. Here there would be no conversion of mass into energy needed to save conservation of energy. Does the bound system behave as though it has less mass than the constituent particles, or is the second explanation just as good? Please help. :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Start with the electron and proton infinitely far apart. Call this 0 potential energy. Now let them fall together under their electrostatic attraction. They feel an attractive force, and the energy of the final configuration is less than it was at infinity--i.e., work must be done to pull them apart, i.e., you must add energy to the system to make them both "free" again. Now, whether the electron and proton spit out a photon to get rid of this energy, or whether the energy is removed in some other way, there is less interaction energy between them when they are bound into an atom than when they were at infinity. The rest mass is the same in both cases, just the rest mass of the electron and the rest mass of the proton. But when they are bound, their potential energy is less. Since energy has mass (E=mc^2), the mass of the bound system is m_proton + m_electron - E_binding/c^2. To find the binding energy, integrate the coulomb force between the particles from infinity to the electronic radius of the atom.

-Beth
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
986
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
10K
Back
Top