Hi, I raised this question in another forum but get no satisfactory answer, so hope will get something new here...(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Stationary orbits of atoms are based on variable separation (time and spatial) of usual Schrodinger equation when Hamiltonian is time independent, and we get eigenvalues for energies that has been proved experementaly by Hertz a long time ago, and basically they are stationary because by this separation we get what callet dynamical phase [itex]e^{-iEt/h}[/itex] that will disapear in propability and current due to terms like [itex]\psi^{*}\psi[/itex].

What I can't figure out, is that strictly speaking, the Hamiltonian of even simple atoms like Hydrogen is not really time independent (or I'm wrong?), the proton in the nuclei is bouncing (even in vacuum) and the EM field not static at all, and there is vacuum fluctuations that comes from QEM, and I read that when Solid State physicists modelling molecules they never assume any stationary states (or stationary eigenstate), and all wave functions are always time dependent.

So my question is how all those things are really fit together and if Stationarity is just and idealization or they really exists (up to a very accurate and careful treatment) even so Hamiltonian is not time independent?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

# Stationary Orbits, Are they Real or just Idilization?

Know someone interested in this topic? Share a link to this question via email,
Google+,
Twitter, or
Facebook

Have something to add?

- Similar discussions for: Stationary Orbits, Are they Real or just Idilization?

Loading...

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**