How Did They Derive Quantized Energy Levels in a 1D Atom?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pengwuino
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Confused
Pengwuino
Gold Member
Messages
5,112
Reaction score
20
The book I am using did a simple little algebra and it is showing the quantized energy levels of an electron in a one-dimensional atom of width 0.1nm.

They did this:

<br /> \begin{array}{l}<br /> E_n = n^2 \frac{{h^2 }}{{8ml^2 }} \\ <br /> E_n = n^2 \frac{{h^2 c^2 }}{{8mc^2 l^2 }} \\ <br /> E_n = n^2 \frac{{(1239.8eV*nm)^2 }}{{(8)(0.511*10^6 eV)(0.1nm)^2 }} \\ <br /> \end{array}

But where did the c^2 go on top?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The c has been put with the h to give something with units of [E][T]\frac{[L]}{[T]} = [E][L], and numerically h c = 1239.8 eV nm. This is one of those common estimation factors, although I remember it as \hbar c \sim 200 eV nm.
 
Last edited:
Oh ok i get why they did this. They have a conversion at the front of the book for hc = (1239.8eV*nm) that i didn't notice or make the connection to.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top