Quick Navigation
Topics
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Quantum Simulation
Classification of Transuranium Elements in Terms of `Winding' Numbers in the Bohr-Sommerfeld Model
arXiv
Authors: Sergei K. Suslov
Year
2025
Paper ID
51179
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
108
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We revisit the Bohr-Sommerfeld atomic model to explore hydrogen-like ions of Uranium $Z=92$, Oganesson $Z=118$, and hypothetical superheavy elements beyond. Although superseded by the Dirac equation and modern quantum electrodynamics, the semiclassical approach offers a historically and pedagogically valuable perspective. Using the Sommerfeld fine structure formula and computer algebra methods, we demonstrate the appearance of self-intersecting orbits in super strong Coulomb fields, beginning with Oganesson and hypothetical elements up to Zle137. These orbits can be classified by their `winding' numbers, providing a simple topological description of Coulomb field strength in this framework. Our results highlight a conceptual bridge between early quantum theory and modern superheavy element physics.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2025 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We revisit the Bohr-Sommerfeld atomic model to explore hydrogen-like ions of Uranium Z=92, Oganesson Z=118, and hypothetical superheavy elements beyond.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.