Bohr model electron wavelengths

copernicus1
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
Hi

I know that in the Bohr model, electrons move between energy levels, but you don't hear much about the electron's wavelength at each particular level. If we assume the orbits contain an integer multiple of wavelengths, you get the usual $$2\pi r=n\lambda,$$ so, based on the expression for the Bohr radius, the wavelength at each level should be $$\lambda_n=\frac{2\pi r}{n}=\frac{2\pi n\hbar}{m_ec\alpha}.$$ Does anyone know if this a standard part of the theory? I've just never assumed the wavelength had to be fixed at each energy level, but that seems reasonable if each level has a fixed energy.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
copernicus1 said:
Hi

I know that in the Bohr model, electrons move between energy levels, but you don't hear much about the electron's wavelength at each particular level.
That is because the deBroglie matter wave model is misleading. You don't need it for the Bohr model and for anything else we have better models.
 
Sure, I understand all that. I'm just curious about the theory more or less as an historical artifact.

Actually, what do you mean when you say the de Broglie matter wave model is misleading? I know you don't need it for the Bohr model since he got from the Balmer series, but what's misleading about it?
 
copernicus1 said:
Actually, what do you mean when you say the de Broglie matter wave model is misleading?
It leads to misunderstandings along the lines of "wave-particle duality"... particles passing through many slits at the same time, interfering with themselves... that sort of thing. Mind you, it is difficult not to be misleading ...
Does anyone know if this a standard part of the theory?
FWIW: it is not part of the standard theory. There are theories it is a standard part of... but I don't know anyone who uses it outside of year I physics classes.
 
It helps to know the timeline:

1913: Bohr publishes his original model with circular electron orbits which were determined by quantizing the orbital angular momentum. Sommerfeld later extends the theory to include elliptical orbits, with a second quantum number.

1924: de Broglie proposes that the electron is actually a wave, and that Bohr's original quantization condition comes from requiring an integer number of wavelengths around a circular orbit. I don't know if he ever generalized this to elliptical orbits.

1925-26: Schrödinger comes up with a differential wave equation for "electron waves." His model no longer has electron "orbits" in the sense of the Bohr-Sommerfeld model. The wave function is distributed around the nucleus in three dimensions. During the same period, Heisenberg comes up with his "matrix mechanics" approach.

After this, physicists abandoned the Bohr-Sommerfeld model very quickly. I don't think one can say that de Broglie's waves were ever a "standard part" of the Bohr-Sommerfeld model. Someone might have attempted to come up with a serious theory along those lines if Schrödinger and Heisenberg hadn't come up with their theories so quickly.
 
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...
Back
Top