The paradox of the nuclear atom can only be resolved in one way. Experimental evidence demonstrates conclusively the existence of a central massive nucleus surrounded by free electrons, where the sizes of both the nucleus and of the electrons are tiny compared with the size of the atom, but classical physics shows such an atom to be unstable. The model analysed above is obviously a model of the real-life hydrogen atom. Qualitatively, the result that the system is stable, with the atomic electron able to exist in one of a number of well-defined energy eigenstates, satisfies the experimental requirements. Experiments which were first carried out by Davisson and Germer and by G. P. Thomson, showed 'wave-like' properties of an electron beam. The important result is that the electron is not governed merely by the laws of classical mechanics and electrodynamics, but by the laws of quantum mechanics.
The paradox of the nuclear atom can only be resolved in one way. Experimental evidence demonstrates conclusively the existence of a central massive nucleus surrounded by free electrons, where the sizes of both the nucleus and of the electrons are tiny compared with the size of the atom, but classical physics shows such an atom to be unstable. The model analysed above is obviously a model of the real-life hydrogen atom. Qualitatively, the result that the system is stable, with the atomic electron able to exist in one of a number of well-defined energy eigenstates, satisfies the experimental requirements. Experiments which were first carried out by Davisson and Germer and by G. P. Thomson, showed 'wave-like' properties of an electron beam. The important result is that the electron is not governed merely by the laws of classical mechanics and electrodynamics, but by the laws of quantum mechanics.
The mere existence of stable atoms, and their arrangement into many-atom nanoscale structures, can only be explained by the laws of quantum mechanics. Indeed, the accumulated evidence regarding the internal structure of atoms motivated the formulation of quantum mechanics at the early twentieth century. Here we focus on single-electron (hydrogen-like) atoms. The dominance of the Coulomb central potential between the electron and nucleus, translates into a simple Schrödinger equation for their relative position distribution. Solving rigorously this equation reveals quantized energy levels, which explains the emission spectra of hydrogen-like atoms (Rydberg formula). The corresponding stationary probability density distributions for the electron around the nucleus are reminiscent of the Bohr model, where classical trajectories (orbits) are replaced by single-electron wave functions (orbitals). The degeneracies of different orbitals, associated with three quantum numbers, will later turn out to be critical for understanding many-electron atoms and the periodic table of the elements.
The hydrogen atom is the Rosetta stone of the early twentieth century atomic physics. The attempt to decipher its structure and properties led to the development of quantum mechanics and the unraveling of many of the mysteries of atomic, molecular, and solid state physics, and a good deal of chemistry and modern biology. Unlike the various one-dimensional model problems that we have been studying in the previous chapters, the hydrogen atom is a real physical system in three dimensions. It consists of an electron moving in a spherically symmetric potential well due to the Coulomb attraction of the positively charged nucleus. In three dimensions, the electron is not constrained to move linearly. It can execute orbital motions and, thus, has angular momentum. Not only is the total energy of the electron in the atom quantized, its angular momentum also has interesting and unexpected quantized properties that cannot possibly be understood on the basis of classical mechanics and electrodynamics. They are, however, the natural and necessary consequences of the basic postulates of quantum mechanics, as will be shown in this chapter. According to classical mechanics and electrodynamics, it is not possible to have a stable structure consisting of a small positively charged nucleus at the center of an electrically neutral atom with an electron sitting in its vicinity. For the electron not to be attracted into the positive charge, it must be orbiting around the nucleus so that the centrifugal force will counter the Coulomb attraction of the nucleus and maintain a constant electron orbit.
The atom model of Quantum Mechanics (QM) was conceived from an unsolved paradox. Indeed, Schrödinger’s equation has been deducted by considering a free electron, but it is applied for the atom, where the electron is inside a potential. In order to eliminate the nonsense, quantum theorists proposed a ridiculous postulate: they claim it makes sense to use the equation because it gives results in agreement to experimental data. The unsolved paradox evidences that Schrödinger’s equation cannot be applied to the physical conditions considered in the QM atom model, and that his equation actually requires some special conditions not considered in the theory (for instance, the electron helical trajectory, rejected by Heisenberg). The banishment of the aether has introduced several paradoxes in the development of Theoretical Physics. And because the theorists have neglected other paradox (from the mathematical probability the spectacular successes of Bohr’s hydrogen atom cannot be accidental), these two unsolved paradoxes introduced dramatic consequences in the development of Nuclear Physics.
The description of the physical and chemical properties of matter is a central issue that has occupied the minds of scientists since the age of the ancient Greeks. In their route to dissect matter down to what cannot be divided any further, they coined the term atom , the indivisible . Matter became then a collection of atoms. More than twenty centuries had to pass until the development of a more precise concept of atom, thanks, amongst others, to the systematic studies of Mendeleyev and the establishment in 1869 of the periodic table of the elements (Mendeleyev, 1869). The discovery of the electron in 1897 and the first modern model of the atomic structure by Sir Joseph Thomson were soon refined by his student, Sir Ernest Rutherford, who in 1910 showed that an atom was made of a positively charged small nucleus and a number of negatively charged electrons that neutralize the nuclear charge. Much in the spirit of planetary systems, and drawing from the analogy between gravitational and electrostatic interactions, scientists in the beginning of the twentieth century built an image of the atom that consisted of a number Z of electrons – of elementary charge – e – orbiting around the nucleus of charge Ze . A number of experimental observations, though, were incompatible with this idea of orbiting electrons. In particular, according to the successful electromagnetic theory, charged electrons in orbital (radially accelerated) motion should radiate energy, thus decelerating and eventually collapsing onto the nucleus. Clearly, such a picture would imply that matter is essentially unstable, in flagrant contradiction with our everyday experience of the very existence of matter.
The basic particle electron obeys various theories like electrodynamics, quantum mechanics and special relativity. Particle under different experimental conditions behaves differently, allowing us to observe different characteristics which become basis for these theories. In this paper, we have made an attempt to suggest a classical picture by studying the requirements of these three modern theories. The basic presumption is: There must be certain structural characteristics in a particle like electron which make it obey postulates of modern theories. As it is ‘difficult’ to find structure of electron experimentally, we make a mathematical attempt. For a classical approach, we require well defined systems and we have studied a system with two charged particles, proton and electron in a hydrogen atom. An attempt has been made to give a model to describe electron as seen by the proton. We then discuss how the model can satisfy the requirements of the three modern theories in a classical manner. The paper discusses basic aspects of relativity and electrodynamics. However the focus of the paper is on quantum mechanics.
Classical mechanics, which gives a fairly accurate description of large systems (e.g., solar system) as also of mechanical systems in our every day life, however, breaks down when applied to small (microscopic) systems such as molecules, atoms and nuclei. For example, (1) classical mechanics cannot even explain why the atoms are stable at all. A classical atom with electrons moving in circular or elliptic orbits around the nucleus would continuously radiate energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation because an accelerated charge does radiate energy. As a result the radius of the orbit would become smaller and smaller, resulting in instability of the atom. On the other hand, the atoms are found to be remarkably stable in practice. (2) Another fact of observation that classical mechanics fails to explain is wave particle duality in radiation as well as in material particles. It is well known that light exhibits the phenomena of interference, diffraction and polarization which can be easily understood on the basis of wave aspect of radiation. But light also exhibits the phenomena of photo-electric effect, Compton effect and Raman effect which can only be understood in terms of corpuscular or quantum aspect of radiation. The dual behavior of light, or radiation cannot be consistently understood on the basis of classical concepts alone or explained away by saying that light behaves as wave or particle depending on the kind of experiment we do with it (complementarity). Moreover, a beam of material particles, like electrons and neutrons, demonstrates wave-like properties (e.g., diffraction). A brief outline of phenomena that require quantum mechanics for their understanding follows.