/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10197229
because theres an neutron dimagnetic forcefield around the proton

>>10197229
it makes me sad that I forgot his. Something about the protons magnetic dipole moment interacting with the electron I think

>>10197229
>physics
>pseudoscience
keep telling yourself that, biocuck

>>10197229
What is not pseudoscience for you, OP?

>>10197229
first of all hydrogen doesnt exist in a single atom state, because of exactly what you said.
you fail @ chemistry

>>10197229
>he unironically thinks the electron is just sitting there, motionless, like in the diagram

>>10197229
>f opposite charges attract, why doesn't the electron fly into the proton and merge?
If gravity attracts then why doesn't the earth fly into the sun and merge?

>>10197288
isn't it technically?

>>10197229
>if gravity is real, why doesn't the moon fall on the earth?

>>10197288
>>10197293
>atoms... are like planets.

if time travels isnt real, why is the 19century posting?

>>10197301
So you're saying you have no problem conceiving of a system where despite attractive fores the entire system doesn't collapse into a zero point?
What do you personally get out of being a facetious cunt?

>>10197229

Because the electron's momentum is perpendicular to the force of attraction.

>>10197329
>dude what is angular momentum
>dude what is uniform circular motion

>what are the energy eigenstates of a hydrogen atom

>>10197344
Bohr's model of the atom was wrong because he neglected the (surprising) zero angular momentum state of the electron.

>>10197286
>unironically believing particles are reality rather than resonant fields

Fuck me I might be a brainlet but I have troubles believing electrons exist at all. I keep imagining some mechanical such as a very small but super fast vibration caused by stressing/compressing a copper coil with a magnet. Maybe when shit moves back and forward fast enough and because no two things can occupy the same place at the same time, there could be an energy-point where actual space can't make way fast enough or fill the hole fast enough (just like a wave). Which would cause stuff to vibrate/resonate just like sound would which we then could consider light. If gravity effects us at the same speed of light a change of gravity would arrive at the same time light would. 'Light' could be slowed down by other mass objects because the 'density' of information gets compressed.
Could you show me some experiments or test results proving the electron, maybe chomped down to a nice documentary. I know I'm probably wrong and I want to understand why, thanks

>>10197692
They are but a metaphor to quantify that which is boundless

>>10197283
Computer science

>>10197229
I hate people like you who think just because you don't understand something, it's flawed.

>>10197229
>physics
>pseudoscience

most people are complaining about the thread but just a few have actually responded

>>10197229
It's like classical electrodynamics isn't sufficient to explain quantum phenomena!

>>10197229
>If the earth pulls on the moon, why doesn't the moon hit the earth?
sage

>>10197285
>what are hydride ions

>>10197283
Psychology, biology, computer science, etc.

Didn't Bohr and Schrodinger solve this

>>10197272
>lashing out at totem enemies when this person probably doesn't even have a STEM degree
why the aggression?

>>10197301
>Doesn't understand simple mechanics or conservation laws
kys bio/compfag

>>10197229
Answering this question pretty much created quantum mechanics

>>10197229
Yes, go publish real science on vixra

>>10197229
>muhh i dont understand physics questions that were solved over 200 years ago

why dont you just kill yourself bro?

>>10197301
You need to be old enough to know what an analogy is before you can post here.

>>10197293
>>10197953
>The moon is not in orbit around the Earth, it's in a "probability cloud" around it, where we can never tell where it is going to be exactly, we can only give estimates.

>>10198590
No, the relevant question was how on earth can charges maintain stable orbits when accelerating charges radiate and lose energy.

I heard the universe is made of 1 electron that is jumping through time and space. So all the electrons that make up YOU is one from different time periods.

Maybe that's what happens when the electron and proton meets? Time travel? Also explains the big bang. Suddenly an infinite amount of electrons appear (travelling back from millisecond and 1 trillion trillion years from the future)

>>10198654
>tfw you will never be this clueless

>>10197229
electrons sometimes tunnel into the nucleus and cause it to transform or fracture.

https://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1226

>>10197229
>why doesn't the electron fly into the proton
It does.

>>10197244
lets say I pull the neutron off
would it collapse

>>10198848
It could become unstable, yes.

>>10198910
for you

>>10197692
>Could you show me some experiments or test results proving the electron
Thomson's cathode ray experiment and Millikan Oil Drop Experiment

>>10197229
because of heisenbergs uncertainty principle, it doesn't have enough momentum. it being in the nucleus is too precise of a position

The picture we often have of electrons as small objects circling a nucleus in well defined "orbits" is actually quite wrong. The positions of these electrons at any given time are not well-defined, but we CAN figure out the volume of space where we are likely to find a given electron if we do an experiment to look. For example, the electron in a hydrogen atom likes to occupy a spherical volume surrounding the proton. If you think of the proton as a grain of salt, then the electron is about equally likely to be found anywhere inside a ten foot radius sphere surrounding this grain, kind of like a cloud.

The weird thing about that cloud is that its spread in space is related to the spread of possible momenta (or velocities) of the electron. So here's the key point, which we won't pretend to explain here. The more squashed in the cloud gets, the more spread out the range of momenta has to get. That's called Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Big momenta mean big kinetic energies. So the cloud can lower its potential energy by squishing in closer to the nucleus, but when it squishes in too far its kinetic energy goes up more than its potential energy goes down. So it settles at a happy medium, and that gives the cloud and thus the atom its size.

>>10199674
hydrogen atom

>>10197229
if like charges repel one another why doesn't this atom explode immediately?

>>10197919
>It's like classical electrodynamics isn't sufficient to explain quantum phenomena

There is quantum phenomenon in electrodynamics. You don't need Schrodinger's equation to get eigen vectors and values

>>10198848
It would be really painful...

>>10201070
what the fuck are you talking about?

>>10198610
>Schrödinger's Moon

>>10197373
>GIT LOW

git low git low git low git low git low

>>10197229
maybe it does. then the proton could spit it out again and we would never notice.

>>10200060
indeed. good question.

>>10197229
>all of physics is literal pseudoscience mental gymnastics.

he said on a computer which is literally built of physics.

i get it though. in reality atomic/sub-atomic physics and prehistorical astronomy are all very realistic fan fictions of gods initial work which got lost when he died.

>>10197244
>>10197285
imagine being this much of a retard

>>10201440
Physicists dont make computers, engineers do

>>10201519
they also don't make bombs but hey

>>10199674
based

The scientifically illiterate have become a threat to us all

>>10197229
>electromagnetism is the only force that acts on the electron and the proton

why doesnt the sun just collapse into a black hole if its being pulled together by gravity, huh? checkmate physicists
Its because theres other shit happening that you arent accounting for

>>10197229
what a plebian way to visualize the atom

>>10200060
stronk force

>>10197229
>t. High schooler who is just now learning about the different atomic models and felt like shitposting using his extremely limited knowledge

Get the fuck outta here will you?

>>10197229
>what are neutrons?
neutral charge, same mass as a proton and an electron combined

>>10197229
>I know what all of physics is
L0Lno fgt pls

>>10202755
You are forgetting the mass of the neutrino and the binding energy

>>10197288
If the electron only stayed in its orbit due to orbital mechanics its would have to travel at speeds > c. The reason it stays in its "orbit" is far more complicated.

>>10197347
>dude what is particle physics

Angular momentum and uniform circular motion has little to do with this situation.

>study ELECTRONics
>unironically don't know how to answer this question
where did everything go so wrong

>>10199674
Jap John Wick to the rescue.

>>10197229
there is no resistance since it is in a vacuum and there is a constant tanget acceleration i guess? lol

>>10202299
teh rest is going for gibs and sjws

>>10197229
>Why doesn't the moon fly into the earth
Imagine being that mentally retarded
Also low quality bait

>>10197229
>Considering classic atom

>>10197836
And that makes you feel superior and cum through your ass, doesn't anon?

>>10197229
>70 posts of clueless undergrads talking out of their ass
>only one correct response >>10199674
Never change /sci/

I had the same question in chem 1 a couple semesters ago and after not getting a satisfactory answer from my teacher looked for one online. Sorry I can't say I have an answer I feel remotely confident in, but what I found suggests that it's WEIRD QUANTUM SHIT, as most electron properties are, and that in a probabilistic fashion, because it CAN have angular momentum it MUST have angular momentum.

Please tell me I'm wrong. I suspect by modern understanding angular momentum is probably not the right word to apply. It's probably more accurate to say the energy state of the electron, or something similar, as that is what determines its orbit.

>>10199674

NEAT! Thanks for the explanation, I'm not OP but I certainly am glad to read one that seems to make sense.

>>10197229
Ever heard of Bohr, op?