Understanding the Bohr Model and Electron Decay

jamie.j1989
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
Hi, I'm really struggling to comprehend how the Bohr model solves the problem of accelerating electrons losing energy and decaying into the nucleus. I've read through a lot of discussions on line and on PF and all I keep on reading is stuff like, the quantization of energy levels leads to a ground state of the energy and so this solves the problem of accelerating charged particles, how? Surely the electrons are still accelerating in the ground state or in any other state for that matter and so must be losing energy, how is this actually countered? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you read the FAQ on this topic here?

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/why-dont-electrons-crash-into-the-nucleus-in-atoms.511179/

BTW, just to correct your spelling, it is "Bohr", not "Bhor". You tend to want to make sure you spell the names of very famous people correctly.

Zz.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks ZapperZ, so am I right in saying that when Bohr put forward this model it was in no way an attempt to explain why electrons don't crash into the nucleus but rather just an attempt at explaining emission spectra? Also this now leads me to ask, if we're now dealing with the electron being some sort of cloud distributed across a volume and the van der Waals force is explained by density distortions in this cloud, wouldn't these distortions emit EM waves and so reduce the electrons energy?
 
jamie.j1989 said:
Thanks ZapperZ, so am I right in saying that when Bohr put forward this model it was in no way an attempt to explain why electrons don't crash into the nucleus but rather just an attempt at explaining emission spectra? Also this now leads me to ask, if we're now dealing with the electron being some sort of cloud distributed across a volume and the van der Waals force is explained by density distortions in this cloud, wouldn't these distortions emit EM waves and so reduce the electrons energy?

Only if a transition to a lower energy state is allowed and available!

You can't just simply ask question like this without dealing with a specific scenario. Your question doesn't indicate if the system is already in a ground state, what are the Hamiltonian of the system in question, etc. ... etc. In other words, your vague question will only allow me to give you a vague answer. And I did.

Zz.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top