Why the energy inversely propotional to n^2 in Bohr model

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the energy levels in the Bohr model of the hydrogen atom, specifically questioning the validity of the energy expression being inversely proportional to \( n^2 \) and comparing it to other quantum systems. Participants explore the implications of different potential shapes on energy levels.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the energy expression in the Bohr model is correct, noting that the energy difference between levels appears to be dependent on \( n \), contrasting it with a general quantum theory text that states energy differences are independent of \( n \).
  • Another participant asserts that the formula \( E_n = -E_0/n^2 \) is correct and attributes this to the shape of the hydrogen potential, explaining that energy levels get closer together as they approach \( E=0 \).
  • Some participants suggest that the energy spacing described in the general quantum theory text may apply to harmonic oscillators rather than the hydrogen potential.
  • A participant acknowledges a misunderstanding regarding the universality of the \( \Delta E = \hbar\omega \) expression and recognizes that the explicit form of energy for a quantum system depends on the potential involved.
  • Another participant draws a parallel between quantum systems and classical physics, emphasizing that dynamics depend on the specific form of the potential.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of the energy expressions in the Bohr model versus other quantum systems. While some agree on the correctness of the Bohr model's energy formula, others highlight potential misunderstandings regarding energy differences in various contexts. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these differences.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the energy levels and their separations are influenced by the specific potential of the system, which may lead to confusion when comparing different quantum models.

KFC
Messages
477
Reaction score
4
After reading some materials on Bohr model, I understand the model is more or less incorrect, especially in terms of "orbital". I just wonder if the energy expression is also wrong or not.

In my text for general quantum theory, the energy about two neighboring level is given as ##\Delta E = E_n-E_{n-1} = \hbar\omega##
which is ##n## independent. But in Bohr model about hydrogen, the quantized energy is given as
##E_n = -E_0/n^2##
which is inversely proportional to ##n^2##. This will give, for example from level ##n## to ##n-1##

##
E_n-E_{n-1} = \frac{-E_0}{(n-1)^2-n^2}
##
which is ##n## dependent. I am quite confusing why is it. Is Bohr model about energy is correct for hydrogen or hydrogen-like atom?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The formula ##E_n = -E_0/n^2## is correct, and is due to the shape of the hydrogen potential.
The hydrogen potential has a top, so the energies levels get closer together as they approach E=0 from below. For E > 0, the energy levels are continuous and the hydrogen atom is said to be "ionized".

Your quantum theory text should not give ##\hbar\omega## increments in energy for the hydrogen potential - I suspect you have misread it - that spacing is for an approximation for other types of potential called "harmonic oscillator".

Note: your equation for the transition energy is incorrect. Try again.

See:
http://astro.unl.edu/naap/hydrogen/transitions.html
 
Simon Bridge said:
The formula ##E_n = -E_0/n^2## is correct, and is due to the shape of the hydrogen potential.
The hydrogen potential has a top, so the energies levels get closer together as they approach E=0 from below. For E > 0, the energy levels are continuous and the hydrogen atom is said to be "ionized".

Your quantum theory text should not give ##\hbar\omega## increments in energy for the hydrogen potential - I suspect you have misread it - that spacing is for an approximation for other types of potential called "harmonic oscillator".

Note: your equation for the transition energy is incorrect. Try again.

See:
http://astro.unl.edu/naap/hydrogen/transitions.html
Thanks a lot. I think I misunderstood some context in the text. I always think the ##\Delta E=\hbar\omega## is universal for all quantum system. Your reply help me to recall the harmonic oscillator. So like what you said, the explicit form of energy for a quantum system is really depending on the potential, is that what you mean?

Thanks anyway.
 
KFC said:
So like what you said, the explicit form of energy for a quantum system is really depending on the potential, is that what you mean?
That is correct - it is exactly the same for classical physics: the dynamics depends on the specific form of the potential. For instance, a ball rolling around the inside of a bowl - requires more kinetic energy to reach the same distance from the center in a steep sided bowl as for a shallow bowl.

You can see this has to be the case if you consider the case of a repulsive potential, or the free-space potential (V=0 everywhere): does it make sense for the allowed energies in these situations to have the same separation as for bound-states?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: KFC
Thanks for clarifying it. I appreciate your help.
 
No worries.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K