General > General Technical Chat

Really dumb question

(1/2) > >>

Alex Eisenhut:
Usually we are told that electrons "orbit" the nucleus. Like electrons are particles that move in 3D paths.
Isn't that a persistent current?
Is space a superconductor? As long as there's strain in the fabric from the positive nucleus?
I don't get it.
I'm probably being what The Great Gazoo would call a dumdum.

ataradov:
You are usually also told that this is a simplified model at the same time.

This is the easiest way to introduce the atom model to kids. And in recent years it actually gets more and more push back, since there are a lot of holes in the model if you assume that involved particles are macroscopic objects. But you cant just throw a bunch of quantum physics at 8th graders.

vad:
There is the electric current. In quantum mechanics, electric current from a charged particle can be defined as the particle's electric charge (e) times the probability current of the wavefunction (j).

Let's take the example of the simplest atom - hydrogen. Skipping boring math, the electron in a hydrogen atom exhibits a nonzero probability current j along the azimuth dimension in spherical coordinates, resulting in a rotating current. Interestingly, it doesn't matter how you orient the spherical coordinates in our 3D world, whether it's bottom up, upside down, left to right, or aligned with the vector from the center of Earth to let’s say Sydney Opera; there will always be a current along the "equator", and zero current along radial and zenith dimensions of the spherical coordinates.

IanB:

--- Quote from: Alex Eisenhut on August 04, 2023, 02:51:53 am ---Usually we are told that electrons "orbit" the nucleus. Like electrons are particles that move in 3D paths.
Isn't that a persistent current?
Is space a superconductor? As long as there's strain in the fabric from the positive nucleus?
I don't get it.
I'm probably being what The Great Gazoo would call a dumdum.

--- End quote ---

The problem with a model of charged particles like electrons orbiting a nucleus is that the charged particles by following a circular path would be under constant acceleration, which means they would be radiating energy. Since atoms at rest do not radiate energy, the charged particle model cannot be correct.

On the other hand, atoms do exhibit magnetic properties, which means there must be an electric current involved (magnetic fields are generated by electric currents). However, the existence of such an electric current does not permit one to say that space is a superconductor. Resistance to electric current is a macroscopic phenomenon. There is no such thing as "resistance" at the quantum scale.

SiliconWizard:
That's not really a dumb question. More like a really unanswered one if we dig a little deeper.

There have been threads with tens of pages already on topics related to this, and I don't think we ever came up with anything "conclusive".

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod