I Atomic orbitals: change during excitation?

pierce15
Messages
313
Reaction score
2
Sorry if this question has been asked before or is common knowledge. It seems to me that when one or more electrons in an atom is excited to a higher energy state, then the effective potential experienced by other electrons should be different from the potential in the ground state. Hence the energy of each state should shift slightly. Is that wrong, or has such an effect been observed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's not really appropriate to talk about states of individual electrons in an atom, the correct description is to talk about the atom as a whole. However, if you use some approximate orbital model of an atom, then the effective nuclear charge seen by an electron depends on what orbitals the other electrons occupy.
 
hilbert2 said:
It's not really appropriate to talk about states of individual electrons in an atom, the correct description is to talk about the atom as a whole. However, if you use some approximate orbital model of an atom, then the effective nuclear charge seen by an electron depends on what orbitals the other electrons occupy.

Sorry, I'm a bit rusty. Could you say whether these statements are true/false so that I can ask the question correctly:

1. The total wavefunction of the atom (ignoring nuclear spin) is equal to the antisymmetrization of the wavefunction of each electron
1.5. The atom in an excited state can be completely described by which orbital each electron is in, right?
2. The "atomic orbitals" are eigenstates for each electron of the total hamiltonian due to the nucleus + other electrons
3. The ground state of the atom is an eigenstate of the hamiltonian of the entire system
4. If statement 2 is true: the energy of the ground state is equal to the sum of the energies of each state occupied by an electron
 
If you have something like a lithium atom, its state is not described by saying "electron 1 has wavefunction ##\psi_1 \left(\mathbf{r_1}\right)##, electron 2 has wavefunction ##\psi_2 \left(\mathbf{r_2}\right)## and electron 3 ##\psi_3 \left(\mathbf{r_3}\right)##. Rather, we say that the state of the whole atom (assuming stationary nucleus) is some function ##\psi (\mathbf{r_1},\mathbf{r_2},\mathbf{r_3},s_1 ,s_2 , s_3)##, where the ##s_i## are the spin variables.

In the orbital approximation (where electron correlation is ignored), however, it is assumed that a good approximation of the energy states can be obtained by making a product form wavefunction ##\psi_1 \left(\mathbf{r_1}\right)\psi_2 \left(\mathbf{r_2}\right)\psi_3 \left(\mathbf{r_3}\right)## and applying an antisymmetrization operator on it.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby and DrClaude
Ok, I see it now. The Hamiltonian for the system defines a set of energy eigenstates for the atom.

Does an ionized atom then have different energy levels from the original atom since it has a different hamiltonian?
 
It's a different system after ionizatìon, so yes, it has different energy levels and spectral lines.
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...

Similar threads

Back
Top