1
$\begingroup$

In our textbook, under developments that lead to Bohr's atomic model, it is stated

  1. Dual nature of electromagnetic radiation.

  2. atomic spectra which could be explained only by assuming quantized electronic energy levels.

Now Bohr used quantization of energy by $E=hf$ to explain $H$ spectra, but I do not understand how the dual nature of radiation comes into play here? As far as I understand only particle nature has been considered here by assuming energy is released in form of packets when electrons jump to a lower state.

Also, how did Bohr overcome the limitation of Rutherford that electrons should lose energy due to acceleration and spiral into the nucleus? Everywhere I searched it's simply stated that they have "fixed energy orbits". But so what? They are still accelerating either way. I just can't take that in, it sounds too make-believe.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This question appears to be more appropriate for hsm.stackexchange.com. $\endgroup$
    – my2cts
    Commented Jul 1, 2021 at 18:38
  • $\begingroup$ Bohr knew his model was not a 'real' model, but IF one had fixed energy 'orbits' then things looked pretty good. The invention of quantum mechanics found just how to fix those energies. $\endgroup$
    – Jon Custer
    Commented Jul 1, 2021 at 21:13

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

What's the importance of the dual nature of particles in Bohr's model?

Bohr's condition, that the angular momentum is an integer multiple of $\hbar$ was later reinterpreted in $1924$ by de Broglie as a standing wave condition: the electron is described by a wave and a whole number of wavelengths must fit along the circumference of the electron's orbit:

$$n\lambda=2\pi r$$ $$\lambda=\frac{h}{mv} \ \ \text{De Broglie Hypothesis}$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{nh}{2\pi}=mvr$$ $$l=n\hbar$$ The stationary orbits are attained at distances for which the angular momentum of the revolving electron is an integer multiple of the reduced Planck constant.

How Bohr's model overcomes the problem with the crashing of electrons in the nucleus?

According to Bohr's model:

Certain stationary states exist in atoms, which differ from the classical stable states in that the orbiting electrons do not continuously radiate electromagnetic energy. The stationary states are states of definite total energy.

which was at that time put by the Bohr somewhat arbitrarily. But It was later explained by Quantum theory. Bohr believed that the assumption is self-evident as the electron does not crash to the nucleus and thus must not emit radiation. He did not give any classical reason for such behavior.

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ Did Bohr think that the EM radiation emitted from the jumps was in a particle form, or did he still stood by the wave formulation, but with the frequency given by the energy difference of the shells? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 24, 2021 at 8:40
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for the answer. I understood the first part. But in second part, how exactly was it later explained by quantum theory? Is there a simple explaination? If not, can you just give me a link to the site where its explained. $\endgroup$
    – Qwerty
    Commented Mar 24, 2021 at 8:41
  • $\begingroup$ @Karim Chahine- I am not sure but I think he stood by particle nature as by applying formula for frequency itself shows quantisation of energy $\endgroup$
    – Qwerty
    Commented Mar 24, 2021 at 8:44
  • $\begingroup$ @Dominic-Selene1.618 I think he could have also meant that frequency is quantized, not necessarily light itself. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 24, 2021 at 8:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @KarimChahine Quoting Wikipedia, "Bohr's formula assumes that during a quantum jump a discrete amount of energy is radiated. However, unlike Einstein, Bohr stuck to the classical Maxwell theory of the electromagnetic field. Quantization of the electromagnetic field was explained by the discreteness of the atomic energy levels; Bohr did not believe in the existence of photons". $\endgroup$
    – Himanshu
    Commented Mar 24, 2021 at 9:48

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.