How Is the Radius r Related to Quantum Number n in Bohr's Model?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between the radius (r) and the quantum number (n) in the context of Bohr's model of the atom. Participants explore the implications of potential energy and angular momentum quantization, as well as the mechanics of circular motion.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a problem involving a particle's potential energy and seeks guidance on how to start solving it.
  • Another participant suggests finding the force from the potential energy and using a resource to establish the relationship between velocity and radius.
  • There is a discussion about the appropriate potential energy to use, with some participants emphasizing the need to derive force from the potential energy specific to the problem at hand.
  • One participant calculates the derivative of the potential energy and expresses uncertainty about the next steps, while others encourage them to apply concepts of centripetal acceleration and circular motion.
  • A later reply outlines a series of calculations leading to the conclusion that the radius is proportional to the square root of the quantum number, based on the derived equations.
  • Participants express varying levels of familiarity with concepts of classical and quantum mechanics, with some indicating they have not yet studied certain topics in depth.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to the problem, and there are multiple competing views regarding the application of potential energy and the mechanics involved. Some participants express confusion about the concepts, while others provide guidance and clarification.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to different systems of potential energy and the necessity of understanding circular motion mechanics, which may not be fully grasped by all participants. There are also indications of varying levels of knowledge regarding quantum mechanics and related topics.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students studying quantum mechanics, particularly those interested in the Bohr model and its implications for atomic structure and angular momentum.

Saitama
Messages
4,244
Reaction score
93

Homework Statement


A small particle of mass m moves in such a way that P.E.=-1/2mk(r)^2, where k is a constant and r is the distance of the particle from the origin. Assuming Bohr's model of quantization of angular momentum and circular orbit, r is directly proportional to:
(a)n2
(b)n
(c)[itex]\sqrt{n}[/itex]
(d)none of these

Homework Equations


[itex]P.E.=-\frac{KZe^2}{r}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution


I don't understand how should i start? :confused:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Last edited by a moderator:
The force is the derivative of the potential energy.
That is, the derivative of the P.E. given in the problem statement, not the one you listed as relevant equation.
 
I like Serena said:
That is, the P.E. given in the problem statement, not the one you listed as relevant equation.

Why i have to find the derivative of P.E. given in the problem statement, not the one in the relevant equations?
And with what respect do i have to find the derivative?

Did you get that i refer P.E. as "Potential Energy"?
 
Pranav-Arora said:
Why i have to find the derivative of P.E. given in the problem statement, not the one in the relevant equations?
And with what respect do i have to find the derivative?

Did you get that i refer P.E. as "Potential Energy"?


The P.E. in the relevant equations is for charges attracting each other, which is what Bohr used in his model of the atom (btw, there should be a minus sign included).

The P.E. in the problem statement is about a different system, for instance a system with a mass on a spring, or a charge inside a sphere with homogeneous charge density.
Since the problem is about this P.E., it is the one you should use.Edit: The derivative is with respect to the only variable you have, which is r.
 
I like Serena said:
The P.E. in the relevant equations is for charges attracting each other, which is what Bohr used in his model of the atom (btw, there should be a minus sign included).

The P.E. in the problem statement is about a different system, for instance a system with a mass on a spring, or a charge inside a sphere with homogeneous charge density.
Since the problem is about this P.E., it is the one you should use.

But how do i find the derivative?
And how do i calculate the force? :confused:
 
Pranav-Arora said:
But how do i find the derivative?
And how do i calculate the force? :confused:

You do know what a derivative is?

Start by listing the P.E. and the derivative of the P.E. with respect to r?
The latter is the force.
 
I like Serena said:
You do know what a derivative is?

Start by listing the P.E. and the derivative of the P.E. with respect to r?
The latter is the force.

Yes, i know what a derivative is.:smile:

[tex]\frac{d}{dr}(P.E.)=-mkr[/tex]

Am i right..?
 
  • #10
Yes! :)
 
  • #11
I like Serena said:
Yes! :)

But what next?
 
  • #12
What did tiny-tim suggest?
 
  • #13
I like Serena said:
What did tiny-tim suggest?

But i have never studied centripetal acceleration...
 
  • #14
All right, but then you will also get into trouble with angular momentum and with quantization...

What do you know about the mechanics of circular motion?
 
  • #15
I like Serena said:
All right, but then you will also get into trouble with angular momentum and with quantization...

What do you know about the mechanics of circular motion?

Nothing. :frown:
I haven't still reached to the circular motion.
 
  • #16
I read circular motion on Wikipedia, i have learned about uniform circular motion.
 
  • #17
So can you follow up on tiny-tim's suggestion?

"use centripetal acceleration to find the relation between v and r"
 
  • #18
I like Serena said:
So can you follow up on tiny-tim's suggestion?

"use centripetal acceleration to find the relation between v and r"

Is the knowledge of uniform circular motion sufficient for centripetal acceleration?
 
  • #19
I think i have got the answer now. :smile:
I did it like this:-
[tex] \frac{d}{dr}(P.E.)=-mkr[/tex]
[tex]ma_c=-mkr[/tex]
[tex]-\frac{mv^2}{r}=-mkr[/tex]
[tex]v^2=kr^2[/tex]

Using Bohr's model of quantization of angular momentum,
[tex]mvr=\frac{nh}{2\pi}[/tex]
[tex]v=\frac{nh}{2\pi mr}[/tex]

Substituting this value of v in our previous equation, i get:-
[tex] \frac{n^2h^2}{4\pi^2m^2r^2}=kr^2[/tex]
[tex]\frac{n^2h^2}{4\pi^2m^2}=kr^4[/tex]Therefore,
[tex] r^4\propto n^2[/tex]
[tex]r^2\propto n[/tex]
[tex]r\propto\sqrt{n}[/tex]
 
  • #20
*bump*
 
  • #21
(:zzz: I guess you haven't seen what the time is where I live!)

Yep! :smile:

So now you know classical mechanics and quantum mechanics.
What's next?
Ready for Maxwell's equations?
Or would you rather do the Schrödinger equation?
 
  • #22
I like Serena said:
(:zzz: I guess you haven't seen what the time is where I live!)

Yep! :smile:

So now you know classical mechanics and quantum mechanics.
What's next?
Ready for Maxwell's equations?
Or would you rather do the Schrödinger equation?


(Oh sorry, i thought you got busy. I too just had a nap. Just woke up.:zzz:)

No, i don't think i know much about quantum mechanics. There's only a small article on it in my textbook. :smile:
And Schrödinger equation is not of my level, i think this because Schrödinger equation is mentioned in my book and after that it is written that solving this equation is not in the scope of this book. Yesterday i started a thread on Schrödinger equation. https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=518047
czelaya said those topics which needs to be covered before solving the Schrödinger equation. And i think, i haven't completed most of the topics stated in the reply by czelaya.

I just saw Maxwell's equations on Wikipedia. And i think it involves the knowledge of partial differentiation. I talked to my physics teacher about the partial differentiation. He said that this is not of my level. :wink:

(Btw, i think i should not learn about these today because tomorrow is my chemistry exam on mole concept and atomic structure :smile:)
 
Last edited:
  • #23
Ah well, I didn't really think you'd want to go for those yet.
I just thought I'd give you something to aspire to. :wink:
 
  • #24
I like Serena said:
Ah well, I didn't really think you'd want to go for those yet.
I just thought I'd give you something to aspire to. :wink:

I would learn them after i have completed with MIT lectures but i don't get time for the lectures too. :smile:
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K