Hydrogen Atom Energy: Ratio of νBohr/νorbit

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the ratio of the frequencies νBohr and νorbit for transitions in Bohr's hydrogen atom as a function of the principal quantum number n. Participants analyze the expressions for energy levels and the corresponding frequencies, noting that the ratio approaches 1 as n increases, aligning with Bohr's correspondence principle. There is a significant emphasis on ensuring the correct substitution of variables and maintaining unit consistency throughout the calculations. Participants suggest checking the derived expressions and calculations for accuracy, particularly in the context of large n values. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the importance of careful algebraic manipulation and unit analysis in deriving physical relationships in quantum mechanics.
v_pino
Messages
156
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



In Bohr’s hydrogen atom, the frequency of radiation for transitions between adjacent orbits
is νBohr = (En+1−En)/h. Classically, a charged particle moving in a circular orbit radiates
at the frequency of the motion, νorbit = v/2πr. Find the ratio νBohr/νorbit for the Bohr
orbits as a function of n. Evaluate the ratio for n = 1, 2, 5, 10, 100, and 1000, and thus show that νBohr/νorbit → 1 as n → ∞. This is an example of Bohr’s correspondence principle—that in the limit of large quantum numbers quantum-mechanical results agree with classical results.


Homework Equations



\nu_{Bohr}=(E_{n+1}-E_n)/h

\nu_{orbit}=\frac{v}{2 \pi r}

E_n= \frac{Z^2}{n^2}E_1

The Attempt at a Solution



From equation 3, can I say E_{n+1}= \frac{Z^2}{(n+1)^2}E_1 ?

Then doing the algebra gives me

\frac{\nu_{Bohr}}{\nu_{Orbit}}=(\frac{1}{(n+1)^2}-\frac{1}{n^2} )\frac{Z^2E_1}{h} \frac{2 \pi r}{v}

Does that seem correct?

However, the values from the brackets of \frac{1}{(n+1)^2}-\frac{1}{n^2} gives me -3/4, -5/36, ... which don't tend to 1.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks right so far. But you have not accounted for the fact that r and v are not constant but depend on n, which will affect the value of the limit for large n. (For example, r is larger for higher n, since higher energy states correspond to larger orbits.)
 
Now I have \frac{\nu_{Bohr}}{\nu_{Orbit}}=(\frac{n}{(n+1)^2}-1 )\frac{Z^2E_1}{h} \frac{2 \pi r}{v} using r_n=\frac{n^2}{Z}a_0.

But even so, this only tells me that the brackets value is getting very small at large n.
 
You need to substitute an expression for vn as well.

Also, this was probably just a typo on your part, but inside the brackets in your previous post it should be
\left( \frac{n^2}{(n+1)^2}-1 \right)
 
I now have the ratio = (\frac {n^3}{(n+1)^2}-n)\frac{E_1 \hbar^2}{mk^2e^2}

But when I evaluate the non-bracket side, I get 1.28*10^-38.
Multiplying this to the bracket doesn't give me a value that tends to 1.
 
v_pino said:
I now have the ratio = (\frac {n^3}{(n+1)^2}-n)\frac{E_1 \hbar^2}{mk^2e^2}
Something is wrong, the units are not working out correctly.
v_pino said:
Now I have \frac{\nu_{Bohr}}{\nu_{Orbit}}=(\frac{n}{(n+1)^2}-1 )\frac{Z^2E_1}{h} \frac{2 \pi r}{v} using r_n=\frac{n^2}{Z}a_0.
If you have replaced r with n2a0/Z, then r shouldn't be in your expression, and a0 should be there. Also, what expression for vn did you use? If you show more of your steps, we should be able to figure out where things went wrong.
 
Is v_n=\frac{Zke^2}{n \hbar}=\frac{Z\alpha c}{n}?
 
Is this right? = (\frac {n^3}{(n+1)^2}-n)\frac{E_1 \hbar^2}{mk^2e^4}

The non bracket is now very big: 1.045*10^40.

I think the bracket tends to -2.
 
got it - thanks
 
  • #10
v_pino said:
Is this right? = (\frac {n^3}{(n+1)^2}-n)\frac{E_1 \hbar^2}{mk^2e^4}
Looks good.
The non bracket is now very big: 1.045*10^40.
I get something different, perhaps you are not paying attention to units and just plugging in some numbers. So -- try including units in your calculation so that you can see them cancelling properly. If they don't cancel out, you probably have to convert some units somewhere. If it's still not working out after doing that, post your calculation of the non-bracket part here.
I think the bracket tends to -2.
I agree.
 
  • #11
v_pino said:
got it - thanks
Ah, glad it worked out :smile:
 
Back
Top