Intro Quantum Mechanics: Neils Bohr Model Explained

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Yashbhatt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bohr Bohr model Model
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the Niels Bohr model of the atom and its historical context within quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of Bohr's model, its limitations, and the transition to more advanced theories such as those proposed by de Broglie, Schrödinger, and Heisenberg.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding de Broglie's model, particularly about the properties of waves and their relation to an electron's potential energy.
  • Another participant provides a historical overview, noting that early models like Bohr's were not entirely correct and led to chaotic developments in quantum theory, including contributions from Sommerfeld, Schrödinger, Heisenberg, and Dirac.
  • There is mention of the transition from Bohr's model to the more comprehensive Schrödinger equation, which addresses limitations of the Bohr model in explaining energy levels of the hydrogen atom.
  • One participant reflects on the necessity of understanding what Bohr's theory explained and its shortcomings, indicating an interest in the development of quantum theory over time.
  • A mathematical relationship is presented that connects energy and angular momentum in classical physics to Bohr's quantization of angular momentum.
  • It is noted that Bohr's model was an ad hoc proposal later justified by de Broglie's wave concept, which influenced Schrödinger's wave equation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity and relevance of the Bohr model, with some acknowledging its historical significance while others emphasize its limitations and the necessity of more advanced theories. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the overall assessment of Bohr's contributions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the chaotic nature of early quantum mechanics and the ad hoc nature of Bohr's proposals, indicating that the discussion is limited by the historical context and the evolving understanding of quantum theory.

Yashbhatt
Messages
348
Reaction score
13
Recently, I saw a video on Introductory Quantum Mechanics. Here's the link : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Gnqpbge3Yk

I failed to understand the explanation of de Broglie's model. He mentions that the waves interfere with each other but how do we know the properties like amplitude etc. of those waves and what does he mean by the "the wavelengths calculated for the electron". Does it relate to the amount of potential energy an electron has?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is plenty of stuff explaining the Bohr model eg:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model

But, yes if looked at carefully it is confusing.

That's because these early models were not really correct and it shows up if you push it too far.

The situation was very chaotic with all sorts of ad-hoc rules invented by Summerfeld and others to try and save the situation. It failed. A breakthrough was required. That came when Schroedinger and Heisenberg developed two very different formulations that fixed it up - wave mechanics and matrix mechanics respectively. And although not usually mentioned a guy called Dirac also had one that was much more elegant based on what's called q numbers. Three separate theories - not good. Then Dirac developed what was known as the transformation theory that tied them all together and was very elegant. Its basically what we call QM today.

That being the case the stuff you are talking about is basically of historical interest. My advice is forget about it. Study the conceptual core of QM:
http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec9.html

Once you have digested that do a separate post and myself and others can explain how that conceptual core explains the hydrogen atom. But basically, its a surprising fact, that only comes out with advanced math, if we want those probabilities to not depend on our coordinate system then this leads to the Schroedinger equation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrödinger_equation

And when you apply it to the Hydrogen atom low and behold it explains all those funny things the Bohr model had trouble with such as exactly why it only had certain energies:
http://www.ciul.ul.pt/~ananunes/QM/Laguerres&Hydrogenatom.pdf

Don't be worried if the math beats you - simply try to get the gist.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are correct but I was thinking that Niels Bohr must have thought some thing. What I din't get is what his theory explained and what it din't. It is interesting to know how the theory was developed over time.
 
Yashbhatt said:
You are correct but I was thinking that Niels Bohr must have thought some thing. What I din't get is what his theory explained and what it din't. It is interesting to know how the theory was developed over time.

In classical physics, an electron orbiting around a proton in a circular orbit would have energy E and angular momentum L related by:

[itex]E = - \dfrac{m q^4}{2 L^2}[/itex]

where [itex]m[/itex] is the mass of the electron, and [itex]q[/itex] is the charge of the electron.

Bohr's hypothesis was that the angular momentum can only be an integer multiple of [itex]\hbar[/itex]. So his model predicted that the allowed energy levels of a hydrogen atom are

[itex]E_n = - \dfrac{m q^4}{2 \hbar^2 n^2}[/itex]

where [itex]n[/itex] is any positive whole number.

It was a completely ad hoc proposal, although it was later given a sort-of justification in terms of de Broglie's suggestion that electrons, besides being particles, have an associated wave. Then de Broglie's idea inspired Schrödinger to come up with his wave equation. (I think Heisenberg's version of quantum mechanics wasn't much influenced by de Broglie.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
567
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K