Electrons at Absolute Zero -- do they still move?

In summary, vanhees71 believes that electrons still move at absolute zero, but this is not correct because the electrons are in the ground state and stationary states do not describe moving particles.
  • #1
Vectronix
64
2
TL;DR Summary
do they still move?
Can we all agree that electrons still move at absolute zero?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yes
 
  • #3
Yes, but it is quite likely that “electrons move” doesn’t mean what you’re thinking.
 
  • Like
Likes curious_mind and Lord Jestocost
  • #4
You mean like it doesn't mean a point particle moving at high speeds around the nucleus?
 
  • #5
Vectronix said:
You mean like it doesn't mean a point particle moving at high speeds around the nucleus?
That’s right, it certainly does not mean a point particle moving at high speeds around the nucleus. If that were in fact an accurate model atoms would be unstable; this was one of the original motivations for developing quantum mechanics as an alternative model.

The “absolute zero” part of your question is a bit of a red herring here - velocity isn’t a very useful concept when thinking about bound electrons under any conditions. We have a bunch of threads about how to think of bound electrons in quantum mechanics, chances are someone here will be able to point you to some.

Edit: the “Suggested for” list of threads below has some good ones.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Lord Jestocost
  • #6
Vectronix said:
TL;DR Summary: do they still move?

Can we all agree that electrons still move at absolute zero?
No, since at ##T=0## the electrons are in the ground state, which is an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, and eigenstates of the Hamiltonian describe stationary states. So nothing moves.
 
  • #7
I liked #2 better :wink:
 
  • #8
Then, how can an energy eigenstate describe a moving particle? It's a stationary state!
 
  • Like
Likes BvU
  • #9
vanhees71 said:
Then, how can an energy eigenstate describe a moving particle? It's a stationary state!
But ##\braket{p^2} \neq 0##. I guess it comes down to what "moving" means :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50, gentzen and vanhees71
  • #10
These are quantum fluctuations, in this case "zero-point fluctuations", not motion.
 
  • Like
Likes BvU and Lord Jestocost
  • #11
DrClaude said:
But ##\braket{p^2} \neq 0##. I guess it comes down to what "moving" means :smile:
vanhees71 said:
These are quantum fluctuations, in this case "zero-point fluctuations", not motion.
Moment without movement. Just like in Bohmian mechanics. Since nearly all physicists agree that this is a shortcoming of Bohmian mechanics, my guess would be that vanhees71 is wrong in this specific case. I just can't believe that Bohmian mechanics should be right in this respect. It will often be the ground state of an harmonic oscillator, and of course oscillate is what it will do.
 
  • #12
OK this thread seems to have run way past OP's question.... Which was kinda sorta OK because it does demonstrate the extent to which the answer depends on how we define "moving" in the absence of the classical intuitive definition. But we're at the point of diminishing returns now, so I am closingthe thread.

As with all such thread closures, we can reopen it if there is more to say in response to the original question - just PM me or another mentor.
 
  • Like
Likes BvU

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
808
Replies
3
Views
891
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
30
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
927
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
944
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
0
Views
245
Back
Top