hyksos wrote:The de Broglie hypothesis helped explain these phenomena by noting that the only allowed states for an electron orbiting an atom are those that allow for standing waves associated with each electron.
Well stated. I was tempted to address orbitals the same way, as it is exactly what I've found.
Biosapien should accept the above as the proper physics answer.The explanation however, never quite
resonated with me personally. As you noted, if an electron accelerates anywhere besides in an atomic orbital, it radiates energy electromagnetically. This can be by linear acceleration or by changing path direction, as in a cyclotron. What makes the atomic orbital an exception is that they correspond to standing waves. To be sure,
I concede the correspondence and consider it a major discovery.
But...Consider a tuned piano string. If struck, it emits a sound characteristic of its fundamental resonance and perhaps some harmonic overtones (higher resonances). So, instead of
containing the energy imparted by the strike, the spring most preferably
emits energy at standing wave frequencies.
The same occurs if an adjustable mechanical oscillator is attached to the spring. As it sweeps through a range of frequencies, most will strain the spring, heating it to then be slowly dissipated. But at standing wave frequencies, a much greater portion of the energy will be emitted as sound.
So, if orbitals in any way represent motion (necessarily acceleration) of an electron, they should enhance energy loss, leading to even quicker collapse into the nucleus.
Conclusion: It is more consistent to think of the standing wave regions about a nucleus as being those which support
superposition as an alternative to any sort of classical motion. Superposition should be considered a state of instantly and probabilistically occupying such a region. It is a state of
being rather than one of
moving. No acceleration, thus stability with no emission.