Why Can't the Niels Bohr Model Be Applied to Other Elements?

Milind_shyani
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
Hi,
we know that we can find the radius and energy of the orbits of hydrogen.now why is it so that we cannot apply the same formulas for other elements by using the equations given by bohr.if there are complications what are they?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Main complication is that the Bohr model is rather far from reality even if it illustrates very simply the fundamentals of quantum mechanics.

However, for most of atomic physics the full quantum mechanics is needed.

For example, orbitals describe stationary waves of electrons in the atom in a very precise way. This description is much more elaborated than the Bohr model. Without, you could never explain chemistry.

As another example you should think to the Pauli exclusion principle: no more than two electron can manage to eccupy the same orbital if they have oppiste spins. Again this is not included in the Bohr model.
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top