Derive an expression of Bohr radius in gravitational case

Frioz
Messages
4
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Both Newton's gravitational law and Coulomb's law are inverse-square laws: The force of attraction
between the sun (S) and Earth(E) has (G*m_S*m_E)/r^2, whereas the force of attraction between an electron and a proton in a hydrogen atom is (e^2)/(4*pi*epsilon_0*r^2). Derive an expression for the equivalent of the Bohr radius for the gravitational case. What is the value of the quantum number of Earth's orbit? Would distance differences between individual quantum states in the solar system be observable?

Homework Equations


F = (G*m_S*m_E)/r^2
F= (e^2)/(4*pi*epsilon_0*r^2)
KE = 1/2 * m*v^2
PE = -e^2 / (4*pi*epsilon_0*r)
U=(G*m_S*m_E)/r
E_total = nhv

The Attempt at a Solution



My attempt was to use the virial theorem, that total energy is equal to one of half of the potential energy. Therefore, since U=-(G*m_S*m_E)/r, then E_total = -(G*m_S*m_E)/2r.

Then I equated E_total = -(G*m_S*m_E)/2r = nhv, and solved for v to get v = -(G*m_S*m_E)/(2rnh).

I then used F = (G*m_S*m_E)/r^2 = (m*v^2) / r and substituted what I got for v, and solved for r. This yielded:

r = (G*m_S*(m_E^2))/(4n^2*h^2).

Is this the correct way to get the Bohr radius?

I also solved for n to get n = sqrt((G*m_S*m_E^2)/(4*h^2*r)) which gave me n=3.533x10^63, which seems to be off by a factor of 10^11 from the actual answer. Any direction would be valuable, and I thank you in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That looks like a very complicated way, but I guess it is possible, if you fix an error:
The last formula cannot be right, it gives inverse meters as unit: WolframAlpha
This is easy to fix - do you expect a larger r to give a smaller n, as your formula suggests? What could have went wrong?
 
I cannot seem to find this error.. I saw that I neglected a negative sign when solving for r, but that doesn't change the magnitude. Am I just missing something algebraic or is there a huge concept that's flying over my head?
 
Well, the idea to find the error is easy: check the units in every equation. At some point it starts to be wrong.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top