Electron shell further away from nucleus higher Energy lvl?

Boomzxc
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Using electrical potential energy =1/4πεo Q1Q2/r , a particle further away from nucleus has lower magnitude of energy

Using coulomb's law, a particle further away from nucleus experiences weaker attraction, hence less energy is needed to maintain orbit* around that e-shell compared to a electron shell closerr to nucleus, hence the one closer to nucleus supposedly should have higher energy.

*i know in reality e- does not orbit around a atom, but its position exists as a probability density of radial probability function.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Boomzxc said:
Using coulomb's law, a particle further away from nucleus experiences weaker attraction, hence less energy is needed to maintain orbit* around that e-shell compared to a electron shell closerr to nucleus, hence the one closer to nucleus supposedly should have higher energy.

No energy is needed to "maintain an orbit" regardless of what the energy level is. What requires energy is removing an electron from a bound state.
 
  • Like
Likes Boomzxc
Boomzxc said:
Using electrical potential energy =1/4πεo Q1Q2/r , a particle further away from nucleus has lower magnitude of energy

Using coulomb's law, a particle further away from nucleus experiences weaker attraction,
hence less energy is needed to maintain orbit* around that e-shell compared to a electron shell closerr to nucleus, hence the one closer to nucleus supposedly should have higher energy.
*i know in reality e- does not orbit around a atom, but its position exists as a probability density of radial probability function.

[SORRY TYPO] :
It's position exists as a probability density OR* radial probability function
 
Is it possible to edit the contents of the thread?
 
Orodruin said:
No energy is needed to "maintain an orbit" regardless of what the energy level is. What requires energy is removing an electron from a bound state.
Ahh yes ! Okay, i understand better now.
Yes, no energy is needed for an electron to maintain an orbit as acceleration is perpendicular to direction of motion

Removing e- from a atom or transitioning it to a higher energy level requires energy.

Thank you , orodruin !
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top