Obtain the first Bohr’s radius and the ground state energy of a muonic hydrogen atom [i.e., an atom in which a negatively charged muon (μ^–) of mass about 207m_e orbits around a proton].

Obtain an expression for the frequency of radiation emitted when a hydrogen atom de-excites from level n to level (n–1). For large n, show that this frequency equals the classical frequency of revolution of the electron in the orbit.

Classically, an electron can be in any orbit around the nucleus of an atom. Then what determines the typical atomic size? Why is an atom not, say, thousand times bigger than its typical size? The question had greatly puzzled Bohr before he arrived at his famous model of the atom that you have learnt in the text. To simulate what he might well have done before his discovery, let us play as follows with the basic constants of nature and see if we can get a quantity with the dimensions of length that is roughly equal to the known size of an atom (~ 10^–10m).

(a) Construct a quantity with the dimensions of length from the fundamental constants e, me, and c. Determine its numerical value.

(b) You will find that the length obtained in A is many orders of magnitude smaller than the atomic dimensions. Further, it involves c. But energies of atoms are mostly in non-relativistic domain where c is not expected to play any role. This is what may have suggested Bohr to discard c and look for ‘something else’ to get the right atomic size. Now, the Planck’s constant h had already made its appearance elsewhere. Bohr’s great insight lay in recognising that h, me, and e will yield the right atomic size. Construct a quantity with the dimension of length from h, me, and e and confirm that its numerical value has indeed the correct order of magnitude.

The total energy of an electron in the first excited state of the hydrogen atom is about –3.4 eV.

(a) What is the kinetic energy of the electron in this state?

(b) What is the potential energy of the electron in this state?

(c) Which of the answers above would change if the choice of the zero of potential energy is changed?

If Bohr’s quantisation postulate (angular momentum = nh/2π) is a basic law of nature, it should be equally valid for the case of planetary motion also. Why then do we never speak of quantisation of orbits of planets around the sun?