Bohr's Atomic Theory: Postulates, Spectral Lines & Quantum Effects

  • Thread starter Thread starter isudipta
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Assignment Home
AI Thread Summary
Bohr's Atomic Theory introduces three key postulates: the existence of stationary states where electrons maintain constant energy while orbiting the nucleus, the relationship between spectral lines and energy differences, and the quantization of angular momentum as an integer multiple of h/2π. The first postulate equates centrifugal force with electrostatic attraction to derive stationary states. The second postulate connects observed spectral frequencies to energy transitions, while the third emphasizes quantization specific to the hydrogen atom, later expanded by Sommerfeld and Wilson using action integrals. Despite its limitations, Bohr's theory accurately predicts the Bohr radius of 0.529177 Å. The fundamental flaw in Bohr's atomic theory lies in its inability to fully account for the complexities of atomic behavior beyond hydrogen.
isudipta
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
(a) The first postulate of Bohr deals with the existence of stationary states in
which the electron has constant energy even as it orbits around the nucleus.
Bohr was the first person to postulate this idea of stationary states. Express
this key assumption in the language of the new quantum theory, i.e. in terms
of operators and states in a succinct form. The way Bohr calculated these
stationary states was to equate the centrifugal force due to rotation in an
orbit with the electrostatic attraction between the electron and the nucleus.
(b) The second postulate of Bohr deals with the spectral lines. This postulates
that the observed frequency in a spectral line ν is given by ν = (E2 − E1 )/h
where E2 and E1 correspond to energies of stationary states. Express this
assumption in terms of older quantum ideas.
(c) The third postulate has to do with the actual quantization or the origin of
quantum effects. This states that the angular momentum in a stationary
state is an integer multiple of h/2^. Express this assumption in terms of key
properties of the relevant operators in the modern quantum theory. Is there
any system treated by classical physics, that shows discreteness in some of
its properties ? It is fascinating that this assumption is also satisfied in the
new quantum treatment of the hydrogen atom.
The third postulate of Bohr is a very specific to the Hydrogen atom and this limi-
tation was removed by the great mathematical physicist Sommerfeld and Wilson.
They postulated this in terms of action integrals of trajectories obtained by solv-
ing the Hamilton’s equations of motion in coordinates (qk , pk ). According to this
1
principle, only those trajectories that satisfy the relation 2π pk dqk = n ̄ where
h
n=0,1,2... This allowed them to calculate the exact orbits.
Probably the biggest contribution of Bohr’s theory of the hydrogen atom is the
magic number 0.529177Ao or the Bohr radius. Despite all the limitations of the
theory, it predicted this number correctly. Based on what we have learned so far,
what do you think is the fundamental flaw in Bohr’s atomic theory ?


please solve...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You took the words right out of my mouth...
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top