Classical Electron: Will It "Fall" Into the Nucleus?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether a classical electron would "fall" into the nucleus, with the premise that classical physics treats electrons as particles influenced by Coulombic forces, similar to planets around stars. The inquiry highlights a misunderstanding of classical mechanics, where a classical electron would indeed lose energy through radiation, leading to a spiral path into the nucleus rather than stable orbits. This contrasts with quantum mechanics, which explains the stability of electron orbits without such energy loss. The conversation emphasizes the limitations of classical physics in accurately describing atomic behavior. Ultimately, the classical view fails to account for the principles of quantum mechanics that govern electron behavior.
LogicX
Messages
175
Reaction score
1
In the classical view of the electron, would the electron "fall" into the nucleus?

I'm not asking why the electron doesn't fall into the nucleus. I know this is explained by quantum mechanics.

But in class the other day, my professor said that treating the electron as a classical particle would lead to it crashing into the nucleus. This didn't really make sense to me. An electron experiences a coulombic force from the nucleus, much like a planet experiences a gravitational force from a star. With a classical view of the electron, wouldn't the electrons just adopt an elliptical orbit like a planet on a much smaller scale, or is there some other distinction between a planet and an electron where the electron would act differently and "fall" into the nucleus?

I know the classical view is wrong, I just didn't know if this reasoning really applied.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


A classical electron would radiate and lose energy.
 


Vanadium 50 said:
A classical electron would radiate and lose energy.

Gotcha, thanks.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top