Timeline for Bohr's model of an atom
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 25, 2021 at 10:17 | comment | added | user100905 |
1. what does it mean for a shell to have an energy level? 2. where does the electron get the energy to revolve around the nucleus from? 3. when the electron jumps from a ground state to other shell, after gaining energy, why does it have to return to its original shell?
|
|
| Jul 10, 2019 at 6:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackChemistry/status/1148834352538824704 | ||
| Jul 7, 2019 at 11:05 | comment | added | matt_black | @user231094 Even if you accept the Bohr model that electrons rotate around the nucleus (and it is a very simplistic model that was rapidly rejected by science), they don't need a constant input of energy to do it. Nor do planets evolving round the sun. They revolve because they have momentum. They keep revolving until something changes that momentum by adding or subtracting energy from the system. Same in Bohr's model. Electrons stay in the same orbit with constant momentum until energy is added and they move to a different orbit. | |
| Jul 6, 2019 at 3:29 | answer | added | The_Sympathizer | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 5, 2019 at 12:14 | answer | added | Karsten♦ | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 3, 2019 at 19:00 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jul 5, 2019 at 11:56 | |||||
| Jul 3, 2019 at 13:29 | answer | added | ACR | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jul 3, 2019 at 11:14 | comment | added | Ivan Neretin | Congratulations, you are precisely at the point where the whole world's physics stood just before the Bohr's model, and I'm not mocking or joking. It is a genuine problem, and a huge one at that. Bohr solved it (sort of) by postulating the existence of certain energy states. The electron can only exist at one of these states, and consequently, can't fall "below" the lowest state, much like a stone can't fall through the ground. (That's why it is called ground state, BTW.) Admittedly, the explanation was rather laconic and pretty much boiled down to "Because I said so, that's why". | |
| Jul 3, 2019 at 10:31 | comment | added | user231094 | @IvanNeretin Where does that energy come from? | |
| Jul 3, 2019 at 10:30 | comment | added | user231094 | @IvanNeretin If the nucleus is attracting the electron, just as your analogy, the earth attracts the stone, there must be a constant supply of energy to the electron to keep it from falling into the nucleus. | |
| Jul 3, 2019 at 10:26 | comment | added | Alchimista | Atoms were formed whatever mechanisms starting from more energetic states. The issue "fixed" by the model is that of discrete abs/emiss lines and finally of stable atoms existence. For the " why electrons return", it is the same as throwing a stone up..... | |
| Jul 3, 2019 at 10:25 | comment | added | Ivan Neretin | Forget quantum stuff for a moment. Forget electricity altogether, it's complicated. Say I'd lift a stone and quickly release it, so for a brief moment there will be just a stone in the air. Being at some height above the ground, it must have some potential energy ($mgh$, they say). Where did it get it from? And more importantly, why does it have to return to the ground, if it has the energy? | |
| Jul 3, 2019 at 10:15 | review | First posts | |||
| Jul 3, 2019 at 13:44 | |||||
| Jul 3, 2019 at 10:11 | history | asked | user231094 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |