Schrodinger equation and atoms

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the applicability of the Schrödinger equation (SE) to the concept of an atom, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics and multiparticle systems. Participants explore the implications of treating atoms as whole entities versus considering them as collections of subatomic particles.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the Schrödinger equation applies to atoms as multiparticle systems, which include at least an electron and a positively charged nucleus.
  • Others argue against the notion of an "atom as a whole," suggesting that it depends on the level of analysis, citing examples like Hamiltonians used in describing weak interactions that treat atoms as individual quantum particles.
  • A participant questions the exact applicability of the Schrödinger equation, seeking proof of its validity in this context.
  • Another participant notes that while the Schrödinger equation can track multiple particles, the complexity increases with the number of particles involved, but emphasizes its linearity allows for such calculations.
  • It is mentioned that no physical equation, including the Schrödinger equation, is exact, and the Dirac equation may provide a better model by incorporating special relativity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the concept of an atom as a whole versus a multiparticle system, with no consensus on the applicability of the Schrödinger equation in this context. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views presented.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the definitions of "atom" and "multiparticle system," as well as the unresolved nature of the proof regarding the Schrödinger equation's applicability.

ralqs
Messages
97
Reaction score
1
To what extent does the Schrödinger equation apply to an atom as a whole?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There's no such thing as <an atom as a whole>, but rather a multiparticle system: at least an electron and with it a positively charged nucleus. So SE will definitely apply, as it's the fundamental equation of QM.
 
dextercioby said:
There's no such thing as <an atom as a whole>, but rather a multiparticle system: at least an electron and with it a positively charged nucleus. So SE will definitely apply, as it's the fundamental equation of QM.

Huh? Of course there is ... it all depends on the level at which you are working. Look for example at the Hamiltonians that are used to describe weak interactions between atoms that result in superfluidity, or BEC ... there is no explicit consideration of subatomic particles .. the atoms are treated as individual quantum particles.
 
dextercioby said:
There's no such thing as <an atom as a whole>, but rather a multiparticle system: at least an electron and with it a positively charged nucleus. So SE will definitely apply, as it's the fundamental equation of QM.

So it applies exactly? How do you know? What's the proof?
 
When you say an atom as a whole, i suppose you're talking about any multi-system of partticles that contains at least a proton in a nucleus and an "orbiting" electron ( i use the word "orbiting loosely, as it does not orbit as planets orbit a star, but appears to), you could add neutrons or more electrons and protons and have a full atom but a "full" or "real" atom only requires a proton in a nucleus. And if you use the Schrödinger equation you can track any number of particles or groups of particles, although the maths gets harder as you use more and more particles it is still possible to track the future of a particle or a group of particles. This is easy as the equation is linear, meaning you can do it in any order, and add all the probability waves of the particles together :D
 
ralqs said:
So it applies exactly? How do you know? What's the proof?

No physical equation is exact, and the Scrödinger equation is no exception. A better model is given by the Dirac equation, which also takes special relativity into account.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K