Use the Dirac Equation to calculate transition frequencies in Hydrogen

In summary: I'm not sure why you write this. In this thread https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-bohr-radius-and-reduced-mass.811962/#post-5096893, it's clear we must use reduced electron mass for precision in these type of calculations. Indeed I do believe it may have been yourself who - some years ago - advised the use of reduced mass. At the time I was making some first attempts at calculating transition frequencies and was worried that the answers were very imprecise. Using reduced mass improved the precision considerably.Even Bohr himself initially did not use reduced mass and again improved the precision of his results (against the spectral measurements of the time) considerably once he did.In summary, the conversation discusses
  • #1
1,101
615
Dirac Energy Formula.jpg

I would just like to understand how to use the above Dirac energy equation to calculate (for example) the 1s-2s transition frequency in hydgrogen. Does one substitute n=1, j=0 for 1s energy level and n=2, j=0 for 2s energy level ?

From previous reading I understand the mass referred to in the formula will need to be the reduced electron mass.

The graphic comes from this reference.
 

Attachments

  • Dirac Energy Formula.jpg
    Dirac Energy Formula.jpg
    5.2 KB · Views: 912
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
neilparker62 said:
I would just like to understand how to use the above Dirac energy equation to calculate (for example) the 1s-2s transition frequency in hydgrogen. Does one substitute n=1, j=0 for 1s energy level and n=2, j=0 for 2s energy level ?
You are confusing ##j## with ##l##. ##j## is the total angular momentum of the electron, ##\vec{\jmath} = \vec{l} + \vec{s} ##. For s orbitals, you get ##j=1/2##.

neilparker62 said:
From previous reading I understand the mass referred to in the formula will need to be the reduced electron mass.
No, it is the rest mass of the electron. In the article cited, they give the correction with the reduced mass of the atom in eq. (23).
 
  • Like
Likes neilparker62
  • #3
Thanks very much - now the substitution is working perfectly for calculating energy level 1. Can I hazard a guess that for the 2p (3/2) level, j will be 3/2 ? And in general that for the 'outermost' energy level of any particular prime quantum number n, j will be n - 1/2 ?

BTW I meant that for calculating H (1s) I would need to be using the reduced electron mass.
 
  • #4
neilparker62 said:
Thanks very much - now the substitution is working perfectly for calculating energy level 1. Can I hazard a guess that for the 2p (3/2) level, j will be 3/2 ? And in general that for the 'outermost' energy level of any particular prime quantum number n, j will be n - 1/2 ?
That's not how addition of angular momenta works. For a state with quantum numbers ##l## and ##s##, the possible values of ##j## are
$$
j = \left| l - s \right |, \left| l - s \right | + 1, \ldots, l + s
$$
So for ##l=1## and ##s=1/2##, the possible values of ##j## are ##j=1/2, 3/2## (that's the fine-structure splitting due to spin-orbit coupling).

neilparker62 said:
BTW I meant that for calculating H (1s) I would need to be using the reduced electron mass.
What do you mean by "reduced electron mass"?
 
  • #6
DrClaude said:
So for ##l=1## and ##s=1/2##, the possible values of ##j## are ##j=1/2, 3/2## (that's the fine-structure splitting due to spin-orbit coupling).

Thanks again.

l (max) = n-1, s=1/2. Then j = n-1-1/2 or j = n-1/2 . Is that correct ?
 
  • #7
neilparker62 said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced_mass

One of the examples given is the hydrogen atom.
I wasn't sure what you meant because it isn't called the "reduced mass of the electron." It is the reduced mass of the hydrogen atom.

And as I said, simply replacing ##m_e## by ##\mu## is not correct. The article gives the equation to use, namely eq. (23), which is much more complicated.

neilparker62 said:
l (max) = n-1, s=1/2. Then j = n-1-1/2 or j = n-1/2 . Is that correct ?
I don't see why you write it in terms of ##n##, since ##l## is independent of ##n##. I know that you wrote l (max), but I don't see why you would concentrate only of the maximum value of ##l##. Anyway, for a single electron, you indeed get
$$
j = l - \frac{1}{2} \mbox{ or } l + \frac{1}{2}
$$
 
  • Like
Likes neilparker62
  • #8
DrClaude said:
I wasn't sure what you meant because it isn't called the "reduced mass of the electron." It is the reduced mass of the hydrogen atom.

And as I said, simply replacing ##m_e## by ##\mu## is not correct. The article gives the equation to use, namely eq. (23), which is much more complicated.
Try for starters:

Ionization energy.jpg


This will give you the Dirac component of Hydrogen's ionization energy. You may compare your answer with this result:

Dirac Formula.jpg

You will need to use the reduced electron mass and CODATA values for all the constants!

The number I give above is from the following reference: https://research.vu.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/2485538

Thanks once again for all your assistance - it has resolved the conundrum I had establishing equivalence between above and the Dirac energy formula.
 

Attachments

  • Ionization energy.jpg
    Ionization energy.jpg
    2.8 KB · Views: 451
  • Dirac Formula.jpg
    Dirac Formula.jpg
    2.2 KB · Views: 496
  • #9
DrClaude said:
And as I said, simply replacing ##m_e## by ##\mu## is not correct. The article gives the equation to use, namely eq. (23), which is much more complicated.

I'm not sure why you write this. In this thread https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-bohr-radius-and-reduced-mass.811962/#post-5096893, it's clear we must use reduced electron mass for precision in these type of calculations. Indeed I do believe it may have been yourself who - some years ago - advised the use of reduced mass. At the time I was making some first attempts at calculating transition frequencies and was worried that the answers were very imprecise. Using reduced mass improved the precision considerably.

Even Bohr himself initially did not use reduced mass and again improved the precision of his results (against the spectral measurements of the time) considerably once he did.
 
  • #10
DrClaude said:
... I don't see why you would concentrate only of the maximum value of ##l##. Anyway, for a single electron, you indeed get
$$
j = l - \frac{1}{2} \mbox{ or } l + \frac{1}{2}
$$

Thanks for confirming. The reason I focus on n, l(max)=n-1 , j=l+1/2 is because in that case the term n-j-1/2 in the Dirac energy formula is zero and the Dirac energy equation simplifies considerably into the following form:

$$E_n=m_{e_r}c^2 \sqrt{1-\frac{\alpha^2}{n^2}}$$

In this case for the transition from energy level n to energy level m with n,m (n>m) being prime quantum numbers, we have:

$$\Delta E=h \Delta f = m_{e_r}c^2 \left( \sqrt{1-\frac{\alpha^2}{n^2}} - \sqrt{1-\frac{\alpha^2}{m^2}}\right) $$

Noting that for Hydrogen Z=1 in the Dirac formula - hence have not included it in the above.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Taking the reduced mass instead of the electron mass is a good first step. But you seem to be after a high precision, so you could try instead eq. (23).
 
  • #12
A 1974 measurement of the Balmer alpha (2p 3/2 - 3d 5/2) line (H I) by laser absorption spectroscopy gave the following result:

15233.07021 cm^-1

The above formula (without any corrections) determines this line at:

15233.07093 cm^-1

I would guess the main corrections would be hyperfine structure adjustments and perhaps lamb shift.

Reference for the above measurement: http://link.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v32/p1336
 
  • #13
Measuring "Ground State Lamb Shift": The Herzberg Experiment

Quoting from the following reference:

http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/234/1199/516

''According to modern quantum electrodynamics, the 1S level (ground state) of hydrogen and deuterium is predicted to lie ##0,272 cm^{-1}## above the energy given by the Dirac theory. In order to obtain an experimental value for this Lamb shift, the absolute wavelength of the ##L_\alpha## line of deuterium has been determined by means of a 3 m vacuum grating spectrograph in fifth order. Lines of the series ##6^{1}S_{0}-n^{1}P_{1}## and ##6^{1}S_{0}-n^{3}P_{1}## of ##^{198}Hg## observed in the same order were used as standards. The wavelengths of these standards were obtained to ##\pm0.0002{\buildrel _{\circ} \over {\mathrm{A}}}## by the combination principle from lines in the visible and near ultra-violet regions, some of which were newly measured. Both the far ultra-violet Hg lines and ##L_\alpha## of deuterium were simultaneously recorded on the plate in absorption. In this way, from six independent plates the wavelength of the ##L_\alpha## line of deuterium was found to be ##1215.3378\pm0.0003 {\buildrel _{\circ} \over {\mathrm{A}}}##. This value refers to an unresolved doublet. If the relative intensity of the two doublet components (2:1)and the temperature of the absorbing column (80°K) is taken into account and the result compared with the Dirac value of ##L_\alpha##, a shift of the ##1^{ 2}S## level of ##0.26\pm 0.03cm^{-1}## is obtained. The agreement with the predicted value is very satisfactory.''

Using the formula ##\Delta E= m_{e_r}c^2 \left( \sqrt{1-\frac{\alpha^2}{2^2}} - \sqrt{1-\frac{\alpha^2}{1^2}}\right)## , where ##m_{e_r}## is the reduced mass of the electron for deuterium, the wave number for the above transition is determined as ##82281.939 cm^{-1}##. Deducting Herzberg's very carefully obtained experimental value of ##82281.664 cm^{-1}## a first measure of "ground state lamb shift" ##0.275 cm^{-1}## is obtained. This compares favourably against the predicted Lamb Shift value of ##0.272 cm^{-1}##. Note that in this calculation a measured ##L_\alpha## wavelength of ##1215.3376{\buildrel _{\circ} \over {\mathrm{A}}}## was used based on a later revision of the ##^{198}Hg## standards.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
DrClaude said:
Taking the reduced mass instead of the electron mass is a good first step. But you seem to be after a high precision, so you could try instead eq. (23).
Ok - I think I misunderstood you when you said using reduced mass is incorrect. Rather is it not a case of using a first order approximation when there are second and higher order terms as in Equation 23 per reference article? I tried using Eqn 23 - at a first attempt the calculated ionization energy reduced by about 24Mhz. But I'm not sure if I am using the formula correctly.
 

1. What is the Dirac Equation?

The Dirac Equation is a mathematical equation that describes the behavior of particles with spin in relativistic quantum mechanics. It was developed by physicist Paul Dirac in 1928.

2. How does the Dirac Equation relate to Hydrogen?

The Dirac Equation can be used to accurately describe the behavior of the electron in a Hydrogen atom. It takes into account the electron's spin and its interaction with the electric and magnetic fields of the nucleus.

3. What are transition frequencies in Hydrogen?

Transition frequencies refer to the frequency of light emitted or absorbed by an electron as it moves from one energy level to another within a Hydrogen atom. These frequencies are unique to each energy level and can be calculated using the Dirac Equation.

4. How do you calculate transition frequencies using the Dirac Equation in Hydrogen?

The Dirac Equation involves solving a series of complex mathematical equations, which can be simplified for a Hydrogen atom. The final equation uses the Rydberg constant, electron mass, and the difference between the initial and final energy levels to calculate the transition frequency.

5. Why is it important to calculate transition frequencies in Hydrogen?

Calculating transition frequencies in Hydrogen allows us to better understand the behavior of electrons and the energy levels within an atom. This information is crucial in fields such as quantum mechanics, atomic physics, and spectroscopy, and has practical applications in technology, such as lasers and medical imaging devices.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
844
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
974
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
629
Back
Top