Standing Waves in Bohr's Circular Orbit: Interference Explained

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the inadequacies of Bohr's model of the atom, specifically regarding its treatment of electron waves as standing waves in circular orbits. It asserts that Bohr's model is an outdated classical mechanics approach that inaccurately represents atomic behavior and should not be used in introductory quantum theory. The conversation highlights the evolution of quantum theory, referencing key developments by Heisenberg, Born, Jordan, Dirac, and Schrödinger, which provide a more accurate framework for understanding atomic and subatomic phenomena. The modern quantum theory, particularly the Born probability interpretation, is established as the only robust theory that withstands rigorous testing.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Bohr's model of the atom
  • Familiarity with wave-particle dualism
  • Knowledge of modern quantum theory principles
  • Basic grasp of wave functions and their probabilistic interpretation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Heisenberg-Born-Jordan formulation of quantum mechanics
  • Explore Schrödinger's wave equation and its applications
  • Investigate the implications of wave functions in quantum probability
  • Review the historical context and evolution of quantum theory post-Bohr
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, quantum mechanics researchers, educators teaching atomic theory, and anyone interested in the historical development and modern understanding of quantum mechanics.

roshan2004
Messages
140
Reaction score
0
If electron waves weren't standing waves in Bohr's circular orbit, why and how would the waves interfere ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here, several models are confused. Bohrs model has nothing to do with waves at all. It's an ad-hoc assumption built on classical mechanics, separating out the "Bohr orbits" by a quantization condition on the action of bound (quasiharmonic) motions. This model works as it is by chance for the harmonic oscillator and the non-relativistic hydrogen atom and has become completely unnecessary to deal with with the discovery of the modern quantum theory (Heisenberg-Born-Jordan 1925, Dirac 1925, Schrödinger 1926) and shouldn't be considered anymore, particularly not in introductory treatments of quantum theory, because it provides a completely wrong picture about nature in the atomic and subatomic realm.

Then there has been also some predecessor of modern quantum theory which appeared at around the same time as Bohr's model. It's become (in)famous under names like "wave-particle dualism". This goes back to de Broglie, who had the ingenious idea to describe particles as waves (as photons are described as a kind of "light particles" but on the other hand also as electromagnetic wave). Again one cannot stress clearly enough that also this idea leads to contradictions and is also a misconception on a qualitative level!

The only theory, withstanding so far any test (and there are very hard tests!) to disprove it, is modern quantum theory with the Born probability interpretation of the states, which in certain special cases of non-relativistic quantum theory can be described by "wave functions", which obey a partial differential equation with wave-like solutions. However, these wave functions are not to be confused with classical fields, because they have a probabilistic meaning, i.e., their square |\psi(t,\vec{x})|^2 is the probability distribution to find a particle at the position \vec{x} when measured at time t (provided the particle is prepared in the state, described by this wave function).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K