Calculating the Stark Effect (Spectral line splitting)?

HMS-776
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Is the equation for calculating the Stark effect the same for every atom?

I am trying to understand how to calculate the Stark effect for Oxygen but do not understand the formula.

Can someone please explain and show me how to calculate the Stark effect?

It would be greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's in practically every good textbook on quantum mechanics. There's also the wikipedia page, or the hyperphysics page.

Have you studied the prerequisite physics and math to learn this stuff? If you don't understand what the equations are supposed to mean, I'd have to think the answer to that is 'no'. In which case, why would you expect to understand it? And what would you expect people to do? Give a whole undergraduate course in physics within a forum thread?
 
Yes you're right.

I know very little physics, which is why I'm here. I am trying to determine which
wavelength(s) are needed to excite the oxygen atom to it's 4th energy level in a high voltage field containing plasma and ambient air.

The high voltage field is around 20kV. I need to first determine the V/cm. I know that the stark effect causes spectral line splitting. And the higher the e field the more splitting will be. I am just trying to determine or at least estimate what wavelengths I would need.

I know this in most cases would take more knowledge than I currently have to figure out, so I am trying to enlist the help of others.
 
Last edited:
HMS-776 said:
Is the equation for calculating the Stark effect the same for every atom?

I am trying to understand how to calculate the Stark effect for Oxygen but do not understand the formula.

Can someone please explain and show me how to calculate the Stark effect?

It would be greatly appreciated!

I am sure, you have many books or papers on the Stark effect.Now I am study the Stark effect too, but I find it is hard to find relative materials on it. Would you send some specially that one include the formula you mentioned above. Thank you.
My email dress is: wengguofeng@hotmail.com
 
There's no formula for calculating the Stark effect.

Think about it? There's no simple formula for calculating the electronic levels of an atom or molecule without an electrical field. There's not going to be one with a field. It's very difficult.

Here's an model approach, which I guess should at least show some of the difficulties involved:
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0402051
 
alxm said:
There's no formula for calculating the Stark effect.

Think about it? There's no simple formula for calculating the electronic levels of an atom or molecule without an electrical field. There's not going to be one with a field. It's very difficult.

Here's an model approach, which I guess should at least show some of the difficulties involved:
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0402051

Thank you for you indication, I will reconsider it.
 
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top