Predicting Spectral Lines: Formula for All Elements

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter prasannapakkiam
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Spectrometer
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the possibility of deriving a universal formula to predict the spectral lines of all elements based on their atomic number. Participants explore the challenges associated with such predictions, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics and electron interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about a formula that can predict spectral lines for any element, noting their experience with a spectrometer.
  • Another participant suggests that as specificity increases, the applicability of a universal formula decreases.
  • A participant questions why a comprehensive formula hasn't been derived despite advancements in quantum mechanics and orbital theory.
  • It is mentioned that while equations exist, they become complex and intractable with additional electrons, requiring approximations and computational resources for accurate predictions.
  • One participant argues that knowledge of ionization energies could potentially allow for predictions of spectral lines, seeking validation for this idea.
  • A later reply indicates that if specific transitions are known, using ionization energies can simplify the problem, but emphasizes the need for an energy level diagram for clarity.
  • Another participant cautions that relying solely on ionization energies may overlook many transitions and include invalid ones, highlighting the importance of selection rules in determining possible transitions.
  • Historical context is provided, noting that early 20th-century physics focused on predicting spectral lines, but the complexity of solving the Schrödinger equation for multiple electrons presents significant challenges.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of deriving a universal formula for spectral lines, with some suggesting that specific conditions or approximations may allow for predictions, while others highlight the limitations and complexities involved. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the existence of a comprehensive formula.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the complexity of equations as electron count increases, the reliance on approximations, and the potential for missing transitions when only considering ionization energies.

prasannapakkiam
Okay. I have made a reasonably accurate spectrometer. Is there a formula that can predict the lines for a given element with a given atomic number. I have done research. The best that I found, is the formula for 'hydrogen-like' elements. So is there a formula to predict all spectral lines of any ELEMENT?
 
Science news on Phys.org
As with most things, the more specific you get, the less an all-encompassing formula works.
 
So there isn't one?

But with all this discovery on orbitals and quantum mechanics, how come nobody has derived a formula for this situation?
 
There are equations, however they quickly become intractable once you start adding more and more electrons to the system - you need to make appropriate approximations (and a decent supercomputer) to predict an emission/absorption spectrum.

Claude.
 
Claude Bile said:
There are equations, however they quickly become intractable once you start adding more and more electrons to the system - you need to make appropriate approximations (and a decent supercomputer) to predict an emission/absorption spectrum.

Claude.

:smile:Don't think I have any of those lying around lately...
 
I don't think you need any supercomputers.
 
Well, I discussed with my friends. If we know the first ionisation energies, surely this soud be enough t predict the lines. Are my friends and I just talking rubbish or is there some approximation or relationship to couple those 2 concepts.
 
prasannapakkiam said:
So is there a formula to predict all spectral lines of any ELEMENT?

Ah, now if you only want to know the values of specific transitions - and you have some energy values such as ionisation energies to aid you, then the problem becomes trivial.

If you know the ionisation energy from two different energy levels, then the energy corresponding to a transition between those two levels is simply the difference in the ionisation energy. Draw yourself an energy level diagram if you are not convinced - remember that the ionisation energy is the energy difference between the orbital of interest (negative) and a vacuum (zero).

Claude.
 
thanks, I didn't know that it was quite so simple...
 
  • #10
Just looking at ionization energies will cause you to miss most transitions, though, and include some that don't exist. Ionization energies are AFAIK given only for the energy levels occupied in the atom's ground state. ie for lithium you have three ionization energies corresponding to the three lowest energy levels. In reality, however, most transitions will involve higher energy levels... eg a transition of the valence electron 2s -> 2p or 2s->3s in lithium.

In addition there are various "selection rules" governing which transitions are possible. For example, photons have spin-1, so in single-photon transitions the total angular momentum must change by 0 or +-1.


In practice you would just look up the spectral lines in a book (eg the CRC) rather than trying to calculate themselves. In the early part of the 20th century there was a whole area of physics devoted to working out predictions (rather postdictions) of spectral lines. As Claude mentioned, it's just elementary quantum mechanics -- you just solve the Schrödinger equations for n interacting electrons in a Coulomb potential -- but this quickly becomes hairy and cleverness in choosing appriximation schemes is necessary. (Or you can just numerically solve the system using a computer.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 207 ·
7
Replies
207
Views
15K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
53K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K