Electron shell further away from nucleus higher Energy lvl?

Boomzxc
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Using electrical potential energy =1/4πεo Q1Q2/r , a particle further away from nucleus has lower magnitude of energy

Using coulomb's law, a particle further away from nucleus experiences weaker attraction, hence less energy is needed to maintain orbit* around that e-shell compared to a electron shell closerr to nucleus, hence the one closer to nucleus supposedly should have higher energy.

*i know in reality e- does not orbit around a atom, but its position exists as a probability density of radial probability function.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Boomzxc said:
Using coulomb's law, a particle further away from nucleus experiences weaker attraction, hence less energy is needed to maintain orbit* around that e-shell compared to a electron shell closerr to nucleus, hence the one closer to nucleus supposedly should have higher energy.

No energy is needed to "maintain an orbit" regardless of what the energy level is. What requires energy is removing an electron from a bound state.
 
  • Like
Likes Boomzxc
Boomzxc said:
Using electrical potential energy =1/4πεo Q1Q2/r , a particle further away from nucleus has lower magnitude of energy

Using coulomb's law, a particle further away from nucleus experiences weaker attraction,
hence less energy is needed to maintain orbit* around that e-shell compared to a electron shell closerr to nucleus, hence the one closer to nucleus supposedly should have higher energy.
*i know in reality e- does not orbit around a atom, but its position exists as a probability density of radial probability function.

[SORRY TYPO] :
It's position exists as a probability density OR* radial probability function
 
Is it possible to edit the contents of the thread?
 
Orodruin said:
No energy is needed to "maintain an orbit" regardless of what the energy level is. What requires energy is removing an electron from a bound state.
Ahh yes ! Okay, i understand better now.
Yes, no energy is needed for an electron to maintain an orbit as acceleration is perpendicular to direction of motion

Removing e- from a atom or transitioning it to a higher energy level requires energy.

Thank you , orodruin !
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Back
Top