The 6 hydrogen spectral line series'

Horseb0x
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
I noticed that the hydrogen spectral lines are grouped into 6 series and given a value for n. I also noticed that each series was named after its discoverer but "coincidentally?" falls into a specific region of the EM spectrum so the Lyman series (n=1) of lines are all in the UV region, the Balmer series (n=2) in the visible region, the Paschen series (n=3) the IR region etc. Firstly is this "n" the principle quantum number? If so what have these series' got to do with the different energy shells of the Bohr model? For example what has the balmer series got to do with the 2nd energy shell? Finally what is it about this correlation that causes the lines of each series to appear where they do. For example why do the lines all appear in the UV region when n=1 but lie in the visible region when n=2?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
See the Rydberg formula for hydrogen. n_2 is the principal quantum number ("energy shell number") of the atom before a transition. n_1 is the principal quantum number of the atom after a transition.
 
So the n=1 series is all the spectral lines emitted by electrons as they fall back to the 1st energy shell. Why do they all emit UV radiation? If the energy emitted is the energy difference between the 2 energy levels then it makes sense that Lyman lines are higher in energy than Balmer lines but the photon emitted by an electron dropping from n=6 back to n=2 would he higher in energy than say n=2 back to n=1 wouldn't it?
 
Last edited:
Horseb0x said:
but the photon emitted by an electron dropping from n=6 back to n=2 would he higher in energy than say n=2 back to n=1 wouldn't it?

No, it wouldn't, because the levels aren't equally spaced. Try plugging in the numbers. The energy of an n=2 to n=1 photon is 13.6eV(1/1-1/4) = 10.2eV. The energy of an n=6 to n=2 photon is 13.6eV(1/4-1/36) = 3.02eV.
 
Ah right, that explains it. Thanks a lot!
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top