Forum menu
As I understand it, an atom is made up of a nucleus of neutrons and protons, with a load of electrons orbiting it.
Like this;
[img] 
[/img]
So how do the electrons keep moving ?
Everything else that moves either slows down, or needs some sort of energy input to keep it moving.
The solar system might appear to us and our time scale to be moving at a constant rate, but it is gradually losing inertia and slowing down. For example, the moon has already stopped rotating on it's axis.
If you left that carbon atom in a box, then came back in a million years, those electrons would still be whizzing around just as you left them.
How do they do that ?
I've no idea, but I like the question.
no
Magnets probably.
I think the answer is they don't and eventually the universe will cease to exist as it cools to nothing.
Theoretically they dont last forever, its just the timescale involved is so huge we cannot measure it
It's at times like this you need a RealMan. Or a GrahamS. ... did the trick for me!
I thought entropy would kick in eventually and it'll all fall apart?
the moon has not stoped spining on its axis, it's period is just 28 days. The slowing dose dose excist and it's matter gitting each other so the planets are loosing momentum. Momentum is unimportant at a molecular level.
Electrons don't wizz around the nucluis the yare held at diffrent enegy levels. Each energy level has a capacity for the number of electrons, when that capcity is full the next electron end up in the next electron level. these levels are discreat. Its all held together with weak and stong intomolecure (sp?) forces.
Why would the electrons ever slow down? There's no friction acting against them to slow them down...
The electrons aren't "orbiting" as such - that's just what they tell you to stop you asking awkward questions. Schroedinger's equation is your friend here, combined with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and your favoured interpretation of the meaning of a wave function.
Hope that make things clear, no doubt a research physicist will be along shortly to help out.
The electrons in an atom are not subject to the same macro-scale physics that bodies such as planets are. You start to get into Quantum Mechanics when you get to sub-atom small.
The electrons have no defined speed of rotation, though it is proportional to the temperature. An atom at absolute zero would have stationary electrons.
If you believe in Heat Death of the Universe [1], then yes, eventually the electrons would stop moving as would everything.
EDIT - Forgot to say, you can't measure the velocity of the electrons without interfering with them Schrödinger's cat and all that.
[1] - [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe[/url]
The electons do not orbit the nucleus in perfect circles, they are ovals. the electrons are attracted to the protons and get pulled towards the centre but they can only follow a set path, so get a slingshot around.
As I understand it, an atom is made up of a nucleus of neutrons and protons, with a load of electrons orbiting it.
It's not really. That is a classical view of the atom, which would indeed suggest the electrons would spiral into the middle. Hence quantum physics.
Because there's no drag on them?
They do infact gain and lsoe energy, based on the pic you posted there the inner 2 electrons orbit at one 'energy level' and the outer 4 at the next (which can contain 8 in that overly simplistic GCSE level model).
If you add energy to the atom it has to be done in discreet packets, just enough to lift an electron to the next level. When the electron falls back down it emits energy as an electromagnetic wave, depending on how much energy (energy proportional to frequency) depends on whether thats visible light, UV or infra red.
For example a bit of iron when warmer than the surroundings emits infra red ratiation, warm it up a bit and it emits red then white light (more energy), get it seriously hot and it'll emit UV, microwaves, X-rays etc.
If you remove the energy from an atom the electrons stop spining and fall to their lowest energy level (2,4 as shown in the picture) at absolute zero (-273.15degC) all eletrons have lost all their energy. Obsiously no all their energy as they still exist and have mass, but they're not moving.
The giggling of the attom and electrons get their enegery from the heat enegy that exists every wher e that T>0 Kelvin.
the moon has not stopped spining on its axis, it's period is just 28 days.
Yeah, I see what you mean, but is that just coincidence ?
I thought it was something to do with the friction caused by the tidal effect of the earth slowing it down until it appears to have stopped from our viewpoint.
Will it continue to slow further until it really has stopped, so that it appears to be orbiting from our viewpoint ?
EDIT - Forgot to say, you can't measure the velocity of the electrons without interfering with them Schrödinger's cat and all that.
Come now, who's been interfering with Schrödinger's cat?
The electons do not orbit the nucleus in perfect circles, they are ovals. the electrons are attracted to the protons and get pulled towards the centre but they can only follow a set path, so get a slingshot around.
Partialy true
S-orbitals are speheres and contain 2 electrons (if full)
d-oritals are made of 6 figures of 8 with the intersections at the nucleus, which is why electrons can't be a solid prticle as the have to pass through the nucleus to complete one orbit.
On the other hand thats just bolloks as they're actualy waves that ocupy a space for a percentage of the time, they're everyhwere at once but most of the time in the shape of the orbital (thats very badly explained).
Surely it's based in the fact that all physical matter exerts some form of gravitational force on something else. It's the crux of things being stuck together and not a big soup of evenly dense everything.
Matter is dense energy, therefore with inter-influential components there will be continuing effects. However, nothing is eternal. Carbon-dating theory elaborates on this and uses the fact that stuff just decays due to resistance, environment, abrasion etc to date objects.
Things will continue to bump into, eat, destroy, absorb, disseminate and stick to other things. I think each of these processes may rejuvenate the bonds (in the way that we make cells) kind of like a matter service.
The above may be complete piffle but it's what I think may be going on, pending further information.
EDIT: in the time it's taken me to write this down, some convincing points have been made 😀
Well the space in which an electron maybe be found at each energy level e.g. s, p and d is determined by the wave function and is measured as a percentage. Can never be accurate due to quantum mechanical effects and in fact it could in theory not even be there at all.
S level orbitals contain up to 2 electrons in a sphere
p orbitals contain up to 6 electrons are 3 * 2 pairs along the x , y and z axis
d orbitals have up to 10 electrons in 5 *2 pairs in a range of Stange shaped orbitals. The d orbitals are actually split into 2 separate energy levels and this is why most transition metals can form nice coloured compounds
And then we have quarks and gluons... 🙂
You are thinking classical Newtonian mechanics when you really need to think about Quantum mechanics.
It looks a bit more like this
http://www.micromountain.com/sci_diagrams/at_struct/at_struct_pages/canimorbshells.htm
The orbitals are probability density functions based on solutions for Schroedinger equation. They are also not defined particles but also waves (wave particle duality because they are so small).
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but it's been 6 years since I did any Quantum mechanics and even then I struggled to get my head round it.
Edit - I also only did Chemistry Quantum which didn't really go much deeper than protons, electrons and neutrons as most things can be explained at that point for checmistry purposes.
Yes the rule with QM is that if you think you understand QM then you really dont
Zip ties hold them together.
redthunder - Member
Zip ties hold them together.
..and filling our heads with grass helps us understand it all 😉
If you're lucky, you'll live 80 years. Why bother your head about stuff that exists on a completely different timescale? That's how I get by!
😀
That diagram is completely wrong......
.......everyone know electrons are orange, not green 🙄
What if the sun is a nucleus and all the planets are electrons and we are all part of an atom?
hilldodger - Member
That diagram is completely wrong.............everyone know electrons are orange, not green
Duh! Electrons are blue, the same colour as electricity.
[i]the same colour as electricity. [/i]
but electricity comes out of the brown wire?
Well funny as its sounds quarks are actaully coloured
[i]sounds quarks are actaully coloured [/i]
yep.
[img] 
[/img]
although the contents are always the same colour.
Anyway, the whole 'orbiting particles' thing is just what the 'liars to children' preach in the 'high church of science' isn't it 😆
If you left that carbon atom in a box, then came back in a million years, those electrons would still be whizzing around just as you left them.
I think you need to talk to schrodinger's cat last time he/she explained/ didn't explain it all to me
They're very frugal.
If you left that carbon atom in a box, then came back in a million years, those electrons would still be whizzing around just as you left them.
Since the electrons have a probability space to exist in that space can be outside the box. Hence they could "tunnel" through it 😉
AFAIK, "The electrons aren't "orbiting" as such". But I think they tell you this to stop you wondering why they don't fall into the nucleus (because it's massive and opposite charge).
Or possibly they use the word "orbit" because in Newtonian mechanics, an orbit/altitude corresponds the kinetic energy of the object, higher orbits having higher energy. While in sub-atomic physics it corresponds to the quantum electrodynamic energy [I'm on seriously shaky ground here - help!] of the electron.
It's more like a vibration at a specific frequency in an infinite flat plane, if I remember that bit of Stephen H's "A Short History..." correctly?
AFAIK, "The electrons aren't "orbiting" as such". But I think they tell you this to stop you wondering why they don't fall into the nucleus (because it's massive and opposite charge).
That's not the problem, the attractive force towards the centre is exactly what allows things to orbit. The problem is classically the electrons should emit electromagnetic radiation as they are accelerated round the orbit, and hence lose energy and spiral into the nucleus. They are still called orbitals as a hangover of the classical picture.
So what are the individual parts of quark?. And therefore what are they made up of ?. This must go on for infinity or it wouldn't exist. They have got to be made up of something or we'll disappear in a puff of logic.
"Sits in woodland glade meditating on a surf board"
*Skims through*
Yeah, what everyone else said, mostly.
When you start getting to this level of quantum physics everything starts getting a bit fuzzy. You look at pictures of electrons and think, oh right, it's a tiny little ball. Well, it isn't. It's an enigma wrapped in a lie.
Normal physics is so much more fun. Planes on conveyor belts, spinning bicycle wheels, helicopters in fish tanks, etc. etc.
where is the higgs boson in all of this?
where is the higgs boson in all of this?
In the church, debating with a priest whether he should be allowed in or not.