How Does the Uncertainty Principle Invalidate the Bohr Model?

AI Thread Summary
The uncertainty principle, represented by ΔxΔp ≥ h/4π, challenges the validity of the Bohr model for the hydrogen atom due to the constraints it imposes on electron behavior. Given the atomic diameter of approximately 10^{-15} meters, the uncertainty in position (Δx) leads to an unacceptably high uncertainty in momentum (Δp). When calculated, this results in a potential uncertainty in velocity that exceeds the speed of light. Such implications demonstrate that the semiclassical Bohr model cannot accurately describe atomic behavior under quantum mechanics. Consequently, the uncertainty principle necessitates a rejection of the Bohr model in favor of more accurate quantum mechanical frameworks.
84527
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Why the uncertainly relation ΔxΔp>h forces us to reject the semiclassical Bohr model for the hydrogen atom?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is fairly easy to prove, the diameter of the atom is of the order of 10^{-15}. Therefore an electron MUST be present in the volume of the atom. So, the maximum uncertainty that can be allowed is 10^{-15}m. Plug this into the equation and what do you get for the uncertainty in velocity?

HINT: Its greater than the speed of light, and that's just the UNCERTAINTY!

And the equation is dx\times dp>=\frac{h}{4\pi}.
 

Thread 'Struggling to understand the concept of this question (ice cube in water optics question)'

TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
View full post »

Thread 'Rolling without slipping on a curved surface'

Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
View full post »

Similar threads

Rutherford model of atom and Bohr model
Replies
1
Views
2K
Rejecting the Semiclassical Bohr Model: Examining the Uncertainty Relation
Replies
1
Views
2K
Bohr-Sommerfeld model question "Old" Quantum Theory
Replies
8
Views
3K
Ground state wavelength and uncertainty Bohr/deBroglie model
Replies
1
Views
2K
How do you modify the Bohr model equation for Li++?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Quantum Theory of Earth Satellite Analogy to Bohr Model
Replies
5
Views
3K
Calculating Energy in Helium Ion Ground State via Bohr Model
Replies
1
Views
2K
What is the Orbit of Hydrogen Atom for an Electron at 734 km/s?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Why do we use Bohr's model of the atom in electrostatics?
Replies
9
Views
1K
Energy transition (bohrs model)
Replies
1
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top