Most probable electron location in Hydrogen ground state

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the most probable location of an electron in the ground state of a hydrogen atom, focusing on concepts of probability density, measurement outcomes, and the implications of quantum mechanics on particle behavior. Participants explore theoretical aspects, mathematical reasoning, and conceptual clarifications related to the electron's position and energy states.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the most probable measurement outcome for the electron's position is at the nucleus, while the expectation value is at the Bohr radius.
  • Others argue that the nucleus is not an energy eigenstate and that measuring the electron's position there would change its state.
  • There is a discussion about the definitions of "most probable" in terms of probability density versus probability per radial distance.
  • Some participants clarify that while the nucleus has the highest probability density, the Bohr radius has the highest probability when considering radial distances.
  • One participant questions whether the electron can exist in the space between quarks, leading to a discussion about the nature of particle positions and energy eigenstates.
  • Participants discuss the implications of measurement on the electron's state and the energy required to localize it within the nucleus.
  • There is a debate about how the conditions of a measurement (fixed volume versus fixed radial interval) affect the probabilities of finding the electron at different locations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definitions and implications of "most probable" locations for the electron, with no consensus reached on whether the nucleus or the Bohr radius represents the most probable location under different measurement conditions.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the discussion hinges on the definitions of probability density and radial distance, and that the implications of measurement on the electron's state are complex and not fully resolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying quantum mechanics, particularly in understanding the behavior of electrons in atoms and the nuances of probability in quantum states.

jaydnul
Messages
558
Reaction score
15
From the ground state wave equation the most probable outcome of anyone measurement will be in the center of the atom, at the nucleus. The expectation value is found to be the Bohr radius.

So does this mean that if you measure the position of an electron in a hydrogen atom in the ground state it will most likely annihilate itself?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, why would it? The electron is not an anti-proton.
 
No. Protons and electrons are not antiparticles.

EDIT: scooped by Orodruin!
 
So what happens?
 
Nothing really. There is not enough energy for electron capture. The state where the electron is found within the nucleus is not an energy eigenstate and the atom may be ionized or end up in a different energy level.

DaleSpam said:
No. Protons and electrons are not antiparticles.

EDIT: scooped by Orodruin!

I'm two for two tonight - I should probably quit while I am ahead.
 
I get it. The only way quarks and electrons interact is through EM, right? (And Gravity)

So can it be in the space between two quarks?
 
Jd0g33 said:
So can [the electron] be in the space between two quarks?

That question makes sense only if you have also have definite positions for the quarks - but Orodruin's comment above about position eigenstates not being bound energy eigenstates applies to the quarks as well. A state in which the positions of the electron and the quarks (three of them, in the most common hydrogen case) are all known is not a state in which you have a hydrogen atom.

You are, I think, trying to think of a particle with a known position as if it were a little tiny ball located at that position. That's not going to work, because that's just not what particles are.
 
Sorry to resurrect this thread but I think I was calculating the probability density wrong. The most probable location for one measurement would be the Bohr radius, not the nucleus, right?

Or is my first post right? The most probable outcome of ONE measurement is the nucleus, and the expectation value (average) is the Bohr radius.
 
This would depend on how you define "most probable". The nucleus has the highest probability density, but the Bohr radius has the highest probability per radial distance.
 
  • #10
I'm a little confused. If the nucleus has the highest probability density, then wouldn't the radius of the nucleus (as opposed to the Bohr radius) have the highest probability per radial distance?
 
  • #11
The highest probability density is calculated "per volume", while the other value is "per radial distance".
You get much more volume per radial distance if the radius is larger (it is growing like the surface of a sphere, with the radius squared).

There is much more volume between 0.95 and 1.05 times the Bohr radius than between 0 and 0.1 times the Bohr radius.
 
  • #12
Oh, OK. So if you added up all the infinitesimal probability densities per volume at different radial intervals, the Bohr radius has the highest magnitude compared to other radial intervals.

But nature doesn't know we think in "radial distances". What I mean is nature doesn't care that two volume elements are at the same radial distance, it just cares about each individual volume element. So really, if we actually do the measurement, the nucleus we be the most probable, yes?
 
  • #13
Jd0g33 said:
Oh, OK. So if you added up all the infinitesimal probability densities per volume at different radial intervals, the Bohr radius has the highest magnitude compared to other radial intervals.

Correct.

Jd0g33 said:
But nature doesn't know we think in "radial distances". What I mean is nature doesn't care that two volume elements are at the same radial distance, it just cares about each individual volume element. So really, if we actually do the measurement, the nucleus we be the most probable, yes?

If by "most probable" you mean the highest probability per volume, then yes.
 
  • #14
Orodruin said:
Correct.
If by "most probable" you mean the highest probability per volume, then yes.

If the experiment was done and you had to place a bet on where you think the electron would be found, would you put your money on the nucleus or Bohr radius?
 
  • #15
That would depend on whether the bet is for a fixed volume or a fixed radial interval.

Edit: And on the odds I am given ...
 
  • #16
Sorry if this is excruciating but it's just not clicking.

You're saying that if I asked you to bet on the radius the electron will be found, you would say the Bohr radius. But if I asked you to bet on the volume the electron will be at, you would say the nucleus? That would mean our betting conditions will effect the outcome of the experiment.
 
  • #17
Let's try it this way.

Divide up the space in the vicinity of the atom into a lot of small equal-size volume elements. Make them all cubes, if you like.

The probability of finding the electron in a volume element that is located somewhere at the Bohr radius is smaller than the probability of finding it in the volume element that is located at r=0.

However, there are many more of those volume elements at the Bohr radius (located at different directions from the nucleus, but the same distance) than there are at the nucleus (where there is precisely one such volume element).

Therefore it turns out that the total probability of finding the electron at the Bohr radius is larger than the probability of finding it at r=0.
 
  • #18
Ahh, completely understand now. Thanks

One more question. When you say that finding the electron at the nucleus is not an energy eigenstate, what do you mean?

When in the ground state (which has the energy value 13.6 eV), there is a probability of finding the electron at the nucleus. So why wouldn't that be an energy eigenstate?
 
  • #19
If you measure the electron to be within the nucleus, then it is no longer in the ground state. Your measurement has affected the system and the electron is now in whatever linear combination of states that make up a wave function where the electron is inside the nucleus. As this wave function evolves in time, the electron probability density will spread accordingly.
 
  • #20
The electron wave function tells that it's mostly inside the Bohr radius and it's also at the nucleus with an small overall probability but with a high density of probability. However the electron wave function exists at both places at the same time (and also it spreads out of the Bohr radius).

In order to find the electron mostly inside the radius you would need a high energy interaction and that would probably free the electron.

In order to have a particle in a definite position it would need infinite energy and since the nucleus is not a point but a very small region, you would have to transfer a lot of energy to the electron.
 
  • #21
K, thanks guys.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Is the potential energy always negative in the ground state of a hydrogen atom?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Undergrad General solution of the hydrogen atom Schrödinger equation
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Undergrad Amount of electrons in nuclei
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Undergrad Voltage between electron and proton in ground state hydrogen atom?
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K
Graduate Energy of the electron in a random hydrogen atom
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Undergrad Solving the Quantum Mechanics of a Hydrogen Atom
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Graduate Electron far away from the nucleus of ground state H atom
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Graduate The state of a hydrogen electon ?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
High School Is the Net Charge of a Hydrogen Atom the Same in Excited State vs Ground State?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Graduate Overlap of Ground States in Quantum Field Theory
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K