Calculating the Radius & Energy of Bohr's Hydrogen Atom

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the radius and energy of the allowed orbits in Bohr's model for the hydrogen atom. Participants are exploring the quantization of energy levels and the relationships between kinetic and potential energy in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to derive the radius and energy using classical mechanics and the quantization of angular momentum. They express confusion regarding the calculation of total energy and identify an algebraic mistake in their initial approach.
  • Some participants clarify the relationship between centripetal force and Coulomb's law, providing alternative expressions for energy and questioning the clarity of the original poster's presentation.
  • Others express confusion about the Rydberg constant and its relation to the energy levels discussed, noting discrepancies in definitions found in external sources.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing clarifications and alternative perspectives on the calculations. The original poster has identified an error and is working towards a resolution, while others are exploring related concepts and definitions.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of energy expressions and constants, with some noting the tendency to express values in terms of energy rather than other physical quantities. There is an acknowledgment of potential confusion stemming from different representations of constants in various contexts.

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,932
Reaction score
283

Homework Statement


1)Determine the radius of the allowed orbits. Calculate the first orbit of Bohr's model for the hydrogen atom.
2)Show that the energy is quantized. Calculate the energy of an electron on the first orbit (fundamental state of hydrogen atom)

Homework Equations



L=n \hbar.
F=\frac{k(e^-) ^2}{R^2}
F=m_e v^2/R
k=\frac{1}{4\pi \varepsilon _0}.

The Attempt at a Solution


I used ideas of classical mechanics, combined with the supposition that the electron orbiting the nucleus doesn't emit photons and that the angular momentum is quantized.
I found out that v=\frac{n \hbar}{m_e R} and that R=\frac{4\pi \varepsilon _0 n^2 \hbar ^2}{(e^-)^2m_e}. I checked out in wikipedia and taking n=1 I indeed find the Bohr's radius, that's why I don't show all my arithmetics here.
I get that for n=1, R\approx 5.29177208 \times 10 ^{-11}m.
And that the velocity of the electron is about 2187691.254 \frac{m}{s}, which is less than 10% of light's speed. Thus I can consider the classical momentum p=m_ev as a good approximation for the momentum value of the electron. Or I can take \frac{m_e v^2}{2} for the kinetic energy of the electron.
Precisely, this is taking this expression for the kinetic energy of the electron that I'm getting a problem for part 2).
So I answered part 1).
Now for part 2, E=T+V, where V=-\frac{k(e^-)^2}{R}.
Replacing T by \frac{m_e v^2}{2}, I reach that E=\frac{(e^-)^4m_e}{16 \pi ^2 \varepsilon _0 ^2n^2\hbar ^2}-\frac{(e^-)^4m_e}{16 \pi ^2 \varepsilon _0 ^2n^2\hbar ^2}=0.
In other words, the kinetic energy of the electron is worth minus the potential energy of the electron and thus its total energy is null. I know this is a wrong answer, I should find -13.6 eV for n=1, but I don't reach this.
Any help to spot my error(s) is welcome. I'm stuck on this since yesterday.

Edit: Nevermind, I found an algebra mistake for T by a factor 1/2. Now I think I'll reach the results.

Edit 2: Indeed, I find something (my calculator can't do the math, it shows E=0 because I'm guessing of an 10^{-106}) by hand that is of the order of -10^{-18}J which is roughly of the order of -10 eV (compared to -13.6 eV) so I'm guessing that my expression is right.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's correct, though you wrote it a bit confusingly :D

Since Coulomb force is the centripetal one,
\frac{Ze^2}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r^2}=\frac{mv^2}{r}\Rightarrow mv^2=\frac{Ze}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r}
Now, E=K+V=\frac{mv^2}{2}-\frac{Ze}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r}=\frac{Ze}{2\cdot 4\pi\epsilon_0 r}-\frac{Ze}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r}=-\frac{Ze}{16\pi\epsilon_0 r}

Substituting your expression for r in the previous equation, you get
E_n=-\frac{Ze^2 }{16\pi\epsilon_0 \frac{4\pi\epsilon_0 n^2\hbar^2}{Ze^2 m}}=-Z^2 m\left(\frac{e^2}{8\pi\epsilon_0\hbar}\right)^2<br /> \frac{1}{n^2}=-Z^2 \frac{R_H}{n^2} where R_H is the Rydberg constant: R_H=13.6eV
 
DiracRules said:
It's correct, though you wrote it a bit confusingly :D

Since Coulomb force is the centripetal one,
\frac{Ze^2}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r^2}=\frac{mv^2}{r}\Rightarrow mv^2=\frac{Ze}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r}
Now, E=K+V=\frac{mv^2}{2}-\frac{Ze}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r}=\frac{Ze}{2\cdot 4\pi\epsilon_0 r}-\frac{Ze}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r}=-\frac{Ze}{16\pi\epsilon_0 r}

Substituting your expression for r in the previous equation, you get
E_n=-\frac{Ze^2 }{16\pi\epsilon_0 \frac{4\pi\epsilon_0 n^2\hbar^2}{Ze^2 m}}=-Z^2 m\left(\frac{e^2}{8\pi\epsilon_0\hbar}\right)^2<br /> \frac{1}{n^2}=-Z^2 \frac{R_H}{n^2} where R_H is the Rydberg constant: R_H=13.6eV
Thank you Mr. Dirac (may I ask you an autograph by the way?).
I am a bit confused with the Rydberg's constant. In wikipedia I read that R_{\infty } in the case of the simplified hydrogen atom is worth \frac{m_e (e^-)^4}{8 \varepsilon _0 ^2 h^3 c} which differs from our case.
 
Probably my fault.

Here is the thing: the problem is that physicists usually tend to express all their constant in terms of energy (despite the original values are temperatures, wavelengths ...)
So, since it is easier to remember, I learned that R_\infty=13.6eV, that is, the lowest energy level of the hydrogen atom.

NB: in the previous note, I didn't write correctly, since I should have written R_\infty instead of R_H

Is that ok?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K