Can the Bohr Model Accurately Predict Electron Energy in a Magnetic Field?

Gavroy
Messages
232
Reaction score
0
hi

i thought that if i try to derive the energy of an electron in a magnetic field, this could be done with the assumptions of the bohr model.

L=n h/(2π)

mv²/r=qvB => mvr=qBr²=>n h/(2π)=qBr²

E=p²/(2m)=q²B²r²/(2m)=n h/(2π)qB/(2m)

so i get the energy for the first level, but all transitions are wrong, as n=2,4,6 etc. should be forbidden, but i do not get this condition.

so my question is: why does this mistake appear?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Gavroy said:
hi

i thought that if i try to derive the energy of an electron in a magnetic field, this could be done with the assumptions of the bohr model.

L=n h/(2π)

mv²/r=qvB => mvr=qBr²=>n h/(2π)=qBr²

E=p²/(2m)=q²B²r²/(2m)=n h/(2π)qB/(2m)

so i get the energy for the first level, but all transitions are wrong, as n=2,4,6 etc. should be forbidden, but i do not get this condition.

so my question is: why does this mistake appear?

Probably, you forget about the "magnetic energy", though the electron (charge= q ) is rotating under the magnetic field. I rearrange your equations here.

According to the Bohr model. the orbital length is an integer (n) times de Broglie's wavelength (=h/mv),
So this fact leads to your first equation of the angular momentum (L).

2\pi r = n \times \frac{h}{mv} \quad \to \quad L = mvr = n \times \frac{h}{2\pi} = n \hbar

The centrifugal force is equal to Lorentz force (= qvB), as shown in your second equation.

\frac{mv^2}{r} = qvB

Using these equations, the angular frequency (= w) of the rotating electron and kinetic energy (K) are

\omega = 2\pi \times f = 2\pi \times \frac{v}{2\pi r} = \frac{v}{r} = \frac{qB}{m}

K = \frac{1}{2}mv^2 = \frac{n\hbar qB}{2m} = \frac{1}{2}n\hbar \omega

Loretz force causes the magnetic moment (= u ) (of rotating electron), which direction is opposite to the external magnetic field,

\mu = I\pi r^2 = \frac{qv}{2\pi r}\cdot \pi r^2 =\frac{qmvr}{2m} = \frac{qn\hbar}{2m}

So the magnetic energy (V) is "plus", as follows,

V = \mu\cdot B = \frac{n\hbar qB}{2m} = \frac{1}{2}n\hbar \omega

As a result, the energy intervals are hw, as follows,

E = V + K = n\hbar \omega

By the way, using Maxwell equation and the above equations, the magnetic flux included in the circular orbit is

\pi r^2 B = \pi \frac{m^2v^2}{q^2 B} = \frac{h}{2q} \times n

where h/2q is "magnetic flux quantum"
 
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