Is the Bohr Model of the atom truly feasible given electron acceleration?

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
Sign up Log in
36 replies · 21K views
GodsChild086 said:
Okay, thanks! Oh, I get what you're saying about the electrons now.

P.S. I don't even know how I came up with the idea of electrons crashing into the nucleus when they emit EMR. It just sort of came to mind one day as I was thinking about it becaue of the great amount of energy electrons give off as they emit EMR. I'm going to see if I can get that book you're talking about at my local library or something.

The idea was viable and correct;happily we found that laws of classical electrodynamics do not apply at quantum/microscopical level,that's all.Those electrons don't emit radiation when the atom is stable and isolated from external interractions,as they should according to classical emectrodynamics.
Even these days people wonder how could the brilliant mind of Sir Ernest Rutherford came up with such a dumb idea...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So let me get this straight...the reason why the electrons (well atoms) would NOT crash into the nucleus when they emit EMR is because most atoms are very stable. (Just remembering something about atoms from Chemistry.)
 
dextercioby I wouldn't say it was a massive step from his particle scattering experiments, though it would have been interesting to work in Rutherfords lab during his time(P.s. I did my degree at the University of Manchester i.e. where rutherford did his work, lol they have a lecture theatre named after him nowadays)

He must of thought (along with Bohr) that is the mass is centered (i.e. in the nucleus) then the only sensible way of thinking about the movement of electrons is in fixed circular orbits. The big step for Bohr was to suggest that they won't radiate energy as they circle the nucleus, this is a big departure from classical electromagnetic theory (as said).
 
loandbehold said:
Not really. Surely if l=0 then you just have the -1/r term, which diverges to minus infinity at r=0, not at r=1.

Well keep in mind that we are discussing electrons that ORBIT around a nucleus...The Bohr model clearly states that [tex]L = n \hbar[/tex] for n = 1,2,3... So the value l = 0 (L =0 ) describes the attraction between two non-orbiting particles...


Also keep in mind that the Bohr-radius is calculated as that radius at which the probability of findinf the electron in its ground state is maximal...

regards
marlon
 
So let me get something else straight...

I forgot that in Physics 20 I learned something about strong and weak nuclear forces. So is it the strong nuclear force that holds those electrons in orbit so that they don't go crashing into the nucleus?
 
GodsChild086 said:
So let me get something else straight...

I forgot that in Physics 20 I learned something about strong and weak nuclear forces. So is it the strong nuclear force that holds those electrons in orbit so that they don't go crashing into the nucleus?

No,the strong interraction only occurs at distances of about 10^-15 m (one fermi),while the electromagnetic interaction is responsable for the atom stability and it is universal,that means it occurs at any distance;the key is that electrons in atoms have close to zero probability of coming to within one fermi of the nucleus.They're most probably found at distances of Angstrom order (10^-10 m) which is 100000 times larger than the typical nuclear distance.
Going deeper into QFT,we say that electrons are leptons that do not "feel" the strong interraction.

Daniel.
 
The strong force holds baryons and mesons together, while the residual strong force will hold atomic nuclei together... Atoms are held together by electromagnetic interactions between the nucleus and the surrounding electrons. Also the angular momentum of the electrons contributes to this interaction...

regards
marlon