Why can't atoms accept energy from static electric fields?

In summary: To first order, the external electric field produces a potential V. The nucleus gains energy ZeV and the Z electrons each gain -eV. The net is zero. That's what I was talking about. (Non-uniformities in the field can produce a small effect, but we can ignore that for now)The net is zero. That's what I was talking about.Okay, so if I understand correctly, your point is that in a classical model, the energy of the electric field can be transferred to the electron, but in a quantum model, it cannot. Is that correct?Okay, so if I understand correctly, your point is that in a classical model, the energy of the electric field can be transferred to the electron,
  • #1
Electric to be
152
6
Though I am definitely not an expert in any way in QM, I understand that on a basic level quantum systems can be solved using schrodinger's equation.

For a hydrogen atom, the wave function of the electron is found by using the hydrogen proton as an external potential and proceeding from there to find discrete energy levels eigenvalues.

Then, this electron can be excited by accepting photons of discrete energies. Sure, makes sense. Now although I may be speaking nonsense, I know that all electric and magnetic fields have an energy density that is proportional to the field strength squared. I also know that a photon is roughly modeled as the particle manifestation of an electromagnetic wave, which is basically a changing electric and magnetic field, propagated according to Maxwell'a equation.

Why is it that the energy from this electric and magnetic field, which is propagating can be accepted by the electron, but the energy stored in the static electric field of the potential field which is used to solve the schrodinger equation, cannot be?

Thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If you put an electron in a constant electric field ##\mathbf{E}(x,y,z)=E \mathbf{u}_x## (where ##\mathbf{u}_x## is the unit vector to x direction and ##E## is a scalar constant), the electron will accelerate indefinitely by accepting energy from the field. The reason for this is that the electron in that kind of field isn't "confined", so it doesn't have a ground state.

EDIT: Just don't confuse this with the "confinement" of quarks in a nucleon (proton or neutron), which means that they can't be found in free form. It might be better to say that in an atom, electron is in a "binding" potential and therefore has some lowest possible energy.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Electric to be said:
Why is it that the energy from this electric and magnetic field, which is propagating can be accepted by the electron, but the energy stored in the static electric field of the potential field which is used to solve the schrodinger equation, cannot be?

Because you can't use a classical model to understand a quantum phenomenon. The model of an EM wave as a propagating EM field is a classical model. It can't explain the phenomenon you are describing--in fact it can't explain the existence of discrete energy levels in atoms at all.

The proper general way to incorporate the EM field into quantum mechanics, at least in a non-relativistic context, is to use the scalar and vector potential to modify the appropriate operators (for example, we replace the momentum operator ##- i \hbar \nabla## with ##- i \hbar \nabla - e A##, where ##A## is the vector potential and ##e## is the charge). The usual Schrodinger equation for the hydrogen atom, which just has a potential energy term corresponding to the static Coulomb potential of the proton, is an approximation that works for a static system.
 
  • #4
Electric to be said:
Why is it that the energy from this electric and magnetic field, which is propagating can be accepted by the electron, but the energy stored in the static electric field of the potential field which is used to solve the schrodinger equation, cannot be?
Static E field has zero frequency and thus the associated photon has zero energy. It has nothing to transfer to electron.
 
  • #5
PeterDonis said:
Because you can't use a classical model to understand a quantum phenomenon

Yes, but there is still a classical problem here. If I put an atom in an electric field, the nucleus gains energy and the electrons lose it (or the other way around) and these almost exactly cancel. (Depending on the atom and field configuration, this cancelation can be exact)
 
  • #6
Vanadium 50 said:
If I put an atom in an electric field, the nucleus gains energy and the electrons lose it (or the other way around) and these almost exactly cancel.

Can you be more specific about what you're referring to? I'm familiar with the Stark effect, the splitting of atomic energy levels in an external electric field, but I'm not sure that can be described as the nucleus gaining energy and the electrons losing it, or the other way around.
 
  • #7
Electric to be said:
Though I am definitely not an expert in any way in QM, I understand that on a basic level quantum systems can be solved using schrodinger's equation.

For a hydrogen atom, the wave function of the electron is found by using the hydrogen proton as an external potential and proceeding from there to find discrete energy levels eigenvalues.

Then, this electron can be excited by accepting photons of discrete energies. Sure, makes sense. Now although I may be speaking nonsense, I know that all electric and magnetic fields have an energy density that is proportional to the field strength squared. I also know that a photon is roughly modeled as the particle manifestation of an electromagnetic wave, which is basically a changing electric and magnetic field, propagated according to Maxwell'a equation.

Why is it that the energy from this electric and magnetic field, which is propagating can be accepted by the electron, but the energy stored in the static electric field of the potential field which is used to solve the schrodinger equation, cannot be?

Thank you.

I think people are missing the central question of the OP. I'm going to try and condense it, and the OP can correct me if I'm wrong:

1. QFT states that EM interaction can be modeled as being carried by virtual photons (there's an Insight article about the misunderstanding of this).

2. So why can't these virtual photons be absorbed and cause a transition in an atom?

Zz.
 
  • #8
ZapperZ said:
2. So why can't these virtual photons be absorbed and cause a transition in an atom?
Because static E field has no photon energy, I think.
 
  • #9
blue_leaf77 said:
Because static E field has no photon energy, I think.

Static field is not the electromagnetic wave radiation. That isn't the issue here based on what I think the OP wrote.

Zz.
 
  • #10
PeterDonis said:
Can you be more specific about what you're referring to?

To first order, the external electric field produces a potential V. The nucleus gains energy ZeV and the Z electrons each gain -eV. The net is zero. That's what I was talking about. (Non-uniformities in E, and thus V, are going to be very small: of order the size of an atom divided by the size of your experiment)

At second order, you have the Stark effect, which moves some orbitals up and others down. If the orbitals are all full, this exactly cancels. If not, the atom adjusts its ground state accordingly. This is usually a reduction in energy, so the atom gives up energy to the field, not the reverse.
 
  • #11
Vanadium 50 said:
To first order, the external electric field produces a potential V. The nucleus gains energy ZeV and the Z electrons each gain -eV. The net is zero. That's what I was talking about.

Ah, got it.
 

FAQ: Why can't atoms accept energy from static electric fields?

1. Why can't atoms accept energy from static electric fields?

Atoms are made up of positively charged protons and negatively charged electrons. When exposed to a static electric field, the negatively charged electrons are attracted to the positively charged end of the field, causing the atom to become polarized. However, this polarization does not result in the transfer of energy from the field to the atom. Instead, the electrons simply shift their position within the atom, without actually gaining any energy.

2. Can atoms accept energy from other types of electric fields?

Yes, atoms can accept energy from alternating electric fields. This is because the direction of the field changes rapidly, causing the electrons to constantly shift their position and gain energy from the field. This is known as an induced current and is the basis for many technologies such as generators and transformers.

3. What determines the strength of an electric field that can be accepted by an atom?

The strength of an electric field that an atom can accept depends on the ionization energy of the atom. This is the energy required to remove an electron from the atom's outermost shell. If the strength of the electric field is greater than the ionization energy, the atom may lose an electron and become ionized.

4. Are there any exceptions to the rule that atoms cannot accept energy from static electric fields?

In certain cases, atoms can gain energy from static electric fields if they are in an excited state. This means that the electrons in the atom have already absorbed energy, causing them to jump to a higher energy level. In this state, the atom's ionization energy may be lower, making it easier for the atom to accept energy from the field.

5. How does the inability of atoms to accept energy from static electric fields affect our daily lives?

The fact that atoms cannot accept energy from static electric fields is fundamental to our understanding of electricity and plays a crucial role in many technologies. For example, the insulation used in electrical wiring is designed to prevent the transfer of energy from static electric fields to prevent damage to electronic devices and ensure the safe transmission of electricity. Additionally, our understanding of atomic structure and the behavior of electrons has led to the development of many innovative technologies such as transistors, semiconductors, and solar cells.

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
303
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top