Jump to content
Jeremy0922

Electromagnetic radiation and steady state of hydrogen atom

Recommended Posts

These are, of course, addressed by QM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are, of course, addressed by QM.

the above is the abstract of my paper published in GED, and the structure and linear spectrum of the hydrogen atom were treated by classical theory.

Edited by Jeremy0922

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have a solution, why say that you don't? Why not just tell us? If you don't, why are you wasting time trying to convince anyone that there will someday be a solution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have a solution, why say that you don't? Why not just tell us? If you don't, why are you wasting time trying to convince anyone that there will someday be a solution?

It will take some time for a new theory to be improved and to solve the questions one by one. I think I have not the ability to complete all works, and more researchers are needed to do these works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An other serious question:

 

By the concept of quantum mechanics, the movement of the particle is random and uncertain, proton coordinate or center of mass coordinate in hydrigen atom are random and uncertain referring to the laboratory,

 

Therefore, the spectrum experimental data of hydrogen atom can not be applied to confirm quantum mechanics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the concept of quantum mechanics, the movement of the particle is random and uncertain, proton coordinate or center of mass coordinate in hydrigen atom are random and uncertain referring to the laboratory,

Okay, there is some fuzziness in quantum mechanics. This is very striking as compared to the classical case. But again, I think you have to be generally careful applying classical notions to quantum mechanics.

 

Therefore, the spectrum experimental data of hydrogen atom can not be applied to confirm quantum mechanics.

But the mathematical predictions of non-relativistic quantum mechanics match the observed specta of the hydrogen atom very well. Not perfectly as you need to add relativistic corrections or use the Dirac equation. Anyway, we have good descriptions of the hydrogen atom in quantum mechanics.

 

Also, even the more weird and highly non-classical predictions of quantum mechanics have been shown to agree well with nature over and over again. For example the wave nature of electrons is established, as is the predictions of the double slit experiment with electrons and we also have experimental verification of quantum entangelment. We have lasers, microchips, the computer you are using to read this and so on... The applicability of non-relativistic quantum mechanics to nature and indeed engineering is not in question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, there is some fuzziness in quantum mechanics. This is very striking as compared to the classical case. But again, I think you have to be generally careful applying classical notions to quantum mechanics.

 

Thank you for your suggestion but I insist my question.

The relationship between the laborary and the coordinate system (used in quantum mechanics) must be clear and certain, and it is the question about the scientific foundation of quatum mechanics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The relationship between the laborary and the coordinate system (used in quantum mechanics) must be clear and certain, and it is the question about the scientific foundation of quatum mechanics.

What is the problem?

 

The fuzziness in on the phase space of the quantum mechanics system and not on space.

 

The you can calculate how the Schrödinger equation and its solutions change under a Galilian transformation. (You can of course do similar things in the operator formalism)

 

You might be interested in the Schrödinger group and its Lie algebra. It describes the symmetries of the free Schrödinger equation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the problem?

 

The fuzziness in on the phase space of the quantum mechanics system and not on space.

 

The you can calculate how the Schrödinger equation and its solutions change under a Galilian transformation. (You can of course do similar things in the operator formalism)

 

You might be interested in the Schrödinger group and its Lie algebra. It describes the symmetries of the free Schrödinger equation.

 

My question is about the coordinate system to describe atom (quantum mechanic system), and I want to known the relationship between the coordinate system and the laboratory. Because that is the basis to compare the experimental data with the theoretical result of Quantum mechanics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My question is about the coordinate system to describe atom (quantum mechanic system), and I want to known the relationship between the coordinate system and the laboratory. Because that is the basis to compare the experimental data with the theoretical result of Quantum mechanics.

 

How big of an error do you think is present from this effect? That's what's missing here.

 

 

In reality it's a non-issue. We solve problems in different coordinate systems all the time. If it matters, then you translate the results. Or, you devise a way to do the experiment so this doesn't come into play. In the case of investigations into atomic structure, the motion of the atom gives rise to a Doppler shift of the absorbed or emitted light. However, one can do spectroscopy in a way that this isn't an issue, called Doppler-free spectroscopy. That removes the effect of the motion of the atom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is about the coordinate system to describe atom (quantum mechanic system), and I want to known the relationship between the coordinate system and the laboratory. Because that is the basis to compare the experimental data with the theoretical result of Quantum mechanics.

The usual thing to do is set-up a spherical coordinate system with the nucleus at the centre. If you at rest with respect to the nucleus then there is no problem at all. What probems are you expecting? Say broadening and shift due to motion of the atoms? You can take this into account in the analysis of the experiments.

 

I am not an expert in this, but for sure this has been carefully looked at. (See what Swansont says above)

Edited by ajb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How big of an error do you think is present from this effect? That's what's missing here.

 

 

In reality it's a non-issue. We solve problems in different coordinate systems all the time. If it matters, then you translate the results. Or, you devise a way to do the experiment so this doesn't come into play. In the case of investigations into atomic structure, the motion of the atom gives rise to a Doppler shift of the absorbed or emitted light. However, one can do spectroscopy in a way that this isn't an issue, called Doppler-free spectroscopy. That removes the effect of the motion of the atom.

I think that lacks logic

The usual thing to do is set-up a spherical coordinate system with the nucleus at the centre. If you at rest with respect to the nucleus then there is no problem at all. What probems are you expecting? Say broadening and shift due to motion of the atoms? You can take this into account in the analysis of the experiments.

 

I am not an expert in this, but for sure this has been carefully looked at. (See what Swansont says above)

the movement of the nucleus is random and uncertain by the concept of quantum mechanics, so the coordinate system moves randomly and uncertainly too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that lacks logic

Well, no. Though perhaps it helps to have done atomic physics.

 

the movement of the nucleus is random and uncertain by the concept of quantum mechanics, so the coordinate system moves randomly and uncertainly too.

How big will this effect be on whatever you're measuring?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is random and uncertain by the description of quantum mechanics.

If it is a classical system, the movement of the center of mass will produce the shift of spectrum, and could be determined by Doppler effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is a classical system, the movement of the center of mass will produce the shift of spectrum, and could be determined by Doppler effect.

It sounds to me like you are looking for descriptions of atoms and molecules beyond the Born-Oppenheimer approximation. You want to take into account how the electons also "tug" on the nucleus and what effects that can have. You don't want to think of the nucleus as fixed at one loctaion.

 

You need to pick up a big book on quantum chemistry at this point. There are various approximations that take this into account to various degrees. I am not an expert in this subject.

 

At the risk of being rude, this should have been part of you "literature review" before starting a project on questioning quantum mechanics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is random and uncertain by the description of quantum mechanics.

If it is a classical system, the movement of the center of mass will produce the shift of spectrum, and could be determined by Doppler effect.

 

Random and uncertain in the details, but not incapable of being mathematically described in terms of some average parameters. So, again: how big is the effect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds to me like you are looking for descriptions of atoms and molecules beyond the Born-Oppenheimer approximation. You want to take into account how the electons also "tug" on the nucleus and what effects that can have. You don't want to think of the nucleus as fixed at one loctaion.

 

You need to pick up a big book on quantum chemistry at this point. There are various approximations that take this into account to various degrees. I am not an expert in this subject.

 

At the risk of being rude, this should have been part of you "literature review" before starting a project on questioning quantum mechanics.

My works is to prove the structure and linear spectrum of hydrogen atom could be explained by classical theory , but I have not thought about problems of molecule etc.

 

Random and uncertain in the details, but not incapable of being mathematically described in terms of some average parameters. So, again: how big is the effect?

I think I have given you my answer above.

"It is random and uncertain by the description of quantum mechanics.

If it is a classical system, the movement of the center of mass will produce the shift of spectrum, and could be determined by Doppler effect."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My works is to prove the structure and linear spectrum of hydrogen atom could be explained by classical theory , but I have not thought about problems of molecule etc.

Okay, but what you are suggesting is very similar here. You do not want to fix the nucleus. The Born-Oppenheimer approximation is sort of used in the standard quantum mechanical model of hydrogen-like atoms. You assume that any uncertianty in the poistion of the nucleus is very small and can be ignored.

 

In a more complete model you would need to take into account the wave function of the nucleus also. I think this can be done for hydrogen-like atoms exactly, but you would have to search the literature yourself. For more complicated systems numerical methods must be used or other approximations.

 

So, the first question is how good is the "Born-Oppenheimer approximation" for hydrogen-like atoms? Would we expect to be able to measure deviations from the simple model and go beyond this approximation?

 

I expect the deviations to be small, if not then the textbooks would say something about this, however you should look into this carefully. (If you have not already)

 

Then, how does this compare to your "classical model"?

Edited by ajb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My works is to prove the structure and linear spectrum of hydrogen atom could be explained by classical theory , but I have not thought about problems of molecule etc.

I think I have given you my answer above.

"It is random and uncertain by the description of quantum mechanics.

If it is a classical system, the movement of the center of mass will produce the shift of spectrum, and could be determined by Doppler effect."

 

 

And my point is that it is still quantifiable. As you claim it's a problem, you have to show that it is actually a problem. If it is smaller than measurement precision, then this is not, in fact, an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And my point is that it is still quantifiable. As you claim it's a problem, you have to show that it is actually a problem. If it is smaller than measurement precision, then this is not, in fact, an issue.

But, there is no problem, if it is considered as a classical system.

Okay, but what you are suggesting is very similar here. You do not want to fix the nucleus. The Born-Oppenheimer approximation is sort of used in the standard quantum mechanical model of hydrogen-like atoms. You assume that any uncertianty in the poistion of the nucleus is very small and can be ignored.

 

In a more complete model you would need to take into account the wave function of the nucleus also. I think this can be done for hydrogen-like atoms exactly, but you would have to search the literature yourself. For more complicated systems numerical methods must be used or other approximations.

 

So, the first question is how good is the "Born-Oppenheimer approximation" for hydrogen-like atoms? Would we expect to be able to measure deviations from the simple model and go beyond this approximation?

 

I expect the deviations to be small, if not then the textbooks would say something about this, however you should look into this carefully. (If you have not already)

 

Then, how does this compare to your "classical model"?

But, random movement and space can not be ignored.

It will take some time to solve the problems you give above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, there is no problem, if it is considered as a classical system.

Except for the fact that you don't actually have a working model based on classical physics. In what way is a non-working model better than a working one?

 

But, random movement and space can not be ignored.

You haven't shown this to be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will take some time to solve the problems you give above.

I expect this has been looked at, I am almost sure as a quick google gave me indications that people have looked at including the wave function of the nucleus. There were suggestions of exact solutions here. You should see if you can find details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except for the fact that you don't actually have a working model based on classical physics. In what way is a non-working model better than a working one?

 

 

You haven't shown this to be true.

You misunderstand my work, as the classical theory has been misunderstood since 1900s.

 

That is the logic deduction by quantum theory, and I think there should not be logic error in a scientific theory.

 

I expect this has been looked at, I am almost sure as a quick google gave me indications that people have looked at including the wave function of the nucleus. There were suggestions of exact solutions here. You should see if you can find details.

Thanks for your information

Edited by Jeremy0922

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You misunderstand my work, as the classical theory has been misunderstood since 1900s.

Quantum theory matches experiment really well. That's a fact.

 

You have not been able to present a working classical theory that matches experiment. That is also a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quantum theory matches experiment really well. That's a fact.

 

You have not been able to present a working classical theory that matches experiment. That is also a fact.

I disagree what you said above, and insist that quantum theory lacks some scientific foundation.

Edited by Jeremy0922

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.