About quantisation of energy

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Thejas15101998
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Quantisation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the quantization of energy in quantum mechanics, specifically comparing the energy levels of a particle in a box and an electron in a hydrogen atom. It explores the underlying mathematical frameworks and intuitive arguments that lead to different proportional relationships for energy in these two scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why energy is proportional to n squared for a particle in a box but inversely proportional to n squared for an electron in a hydrogen atom.
  • Another participant notes that different quantum systems have different Hamiltonians, leading to distinct eigenvalues, suggesting that each case must be solved individually.
  • A participant challenges the expectation that different problems would yield the same solution.
  • One participant presents an intuitive argument contrasting the linear algebra and differential equation approaches in quantum mechanics, explaining how quantum numbers arise from different methods and boundary conditions in the particle in a box and hydrogen atom problems.
  • The intuitive argument includes a comparison of the Bohr model and its periodicity condition, linking it to the inverse relationship of energy and quantum number n for the hydrogen atom.
  • A participant acknowledges their understanding of the topic after the discussion, indicating that the explanations provided were helpful.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between energy and quantum numbers in different quantum systems. There is no consensus on a single explanation, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the intuitive understanding of these relationships.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of quantum mechanics and the varying interpretations of quantum numbers, boundary conditions, and energy relationships. Some assumptions and mathematical steps remain unresolved, particularly regarding the derivation of quantum numbers in different contexts.

Thejas15101998
Messages
43
Reaction score
1
Why is E directly proportional n squared when we consider particle in a box but when we consider electron in a hydrogen atom its E inversely proportional n squared.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In usual linear algebra of finite-dimensional vector spaces, it's pretty obvious that different matrices may have different eigenvalues. Also different Hamilton operators in quantum theory have of course different eigenvalues. You have to solve each case individually.
 
Why would you expect different problems to have the same solution?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Thejas15101998
I would re-emphasize what has been said by vanhees71 and Vanadium 50, but if you are looking for an intuitive argument I believe there is one. Informally speaking, there are two approaches to solving problems in quantum mechanics: the linear algebra approach and the differential equation approach. In the linear algebra approach, quantum numbers like n tend to arise from considerations of the eigenvalues (formally speaking, they are associated with ladder operators when the problem is nice enough to provide them). In the differential equations approach, quantum numbers tend to arise from the Frobenius method of solving differential equations (formally speaking, they are solved for in the first non-zero index equation) or from periodic boundary conditions. Now, the mode quantum number "n" in the particle in a box problem is derived from a periodic boundary condition, which is easy to remember; however, the radial quantum number "n" in the hydrogen atom is derived from the index equations of the radial equation, which is not so easy to remember (to put it mildly). To make an intuitive argument at the expense of mathematical rigor and the correct interpretation of the radial quantum number, you can exchange the solution of the hydrogen atom for the Bohr model in this case. In the Bohr model, the quantum number "n" is derived from a periodic boundary condition as well.

The intuitive argument is as follows: in the Bohr model the periodicity condition ##2\pi r_{n} = n \lambda## means that ##r_{n}## scales with n. Since the energy in the Bohr model goes with the inverse square of r, you know the energy levels go with the inverse square of n. On the other hand, for the particle in a box, the periodicity condition ##\pi L = n \lambda## means that the wavenumber ## k_{n} = \frac{2\pi}{\lambda} ## scales with n. Since in the box V = 0, E = T is proportional to ##p^{2}##, which by the de Broglie relation is proportional to ##k^{2}## which you know is proportional to ##n^{2}##.

Again, to reiterate, this argument is not entirely true, since the Bohr model correctly predicts the quantum number n for the wrong reasons. When you solve the hydrogen atom, the orbit periodicity condition defines ##m_{l}## not n. The only reason I'm proposing this argument is that it is easier to produce from first principles off hand.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Thejas15101998
Thank you guys...now i have understood it...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K