3 ms·

This is such a classic physicist’s answer. It starts off promising, with a lot of context and detailed exposition which leads one to hope that perhaps it will b

by avalys 6y ago

This is such a classic physicist’s answer. It starts off promising, with a lot of context and detailed exposition which leads one to hope that perhaps it will be pulled together into an enlightening explanation at the end. But when one reaches the end, one finds merely the truism “It is this way because that’s what you get when you solve the equations.” (yes, I have spent a lot of time working with physicists.)

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
mhh__ 6y ago
That's because it's really hard to explain physics to non-physicists without using mathematics. The clever part isn't classifying the orbitals, it's finding the Schrodinger equation in the first place. We knew electrons had wavelike properties, but what equation did they obey? Even with hindsight it's still a difficult thing to derive - the relativistic answer is actually wrong, for example. You reach the truism because the equations take years to learn - in engineering you can just take the result and run but in physics you have to be careful to understand what you're doing. The Schrodinger equation for hydrogen isn't that difficult to solve (try it), but conveying that process in English is difficult.
- vertbhrtn 6y ago
  My understanding of QM is very naive, but Schrodinger equation seems really simple to me. I could probably even explain it to a 5 year old. I'd show a few pictures of standing waves on a drum surface: the first two energy levels create simple shapes, higher levels create more sophisticated shapes. Then I'd say that an electron is such a wave. Then I'd introduce the idea of electric potential: I'd put a heavy thing in the center and say that this is how the atom's nucleus warps the electric field; and this changes the wave patterns somewhat, but the idea remains the same. Then I'd say that often multiple standing waves mix together and we get a quasipattern that oscillates between a few standing waves. That's really it.
aeternum 6y ago
You're right. The way to explain it intuitively is that at the quantum scale all particles are wavelike. In order for electrons to achieve stability (such as within an atom), they must create a standing wave. Similar to the notes on a guitar string, each electron orbital is simply a harmonic. The complication comes from the fact that atoms are 3d, so instead you need to use spherical harmonics, but it's the same principle, just standing waves in 3d space. These should look familiar if you've seen rendered images of electron clouds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_harmonics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_harmonics It is quite surprising that this intuition is basically never taught in classrooms.
- pinopinopino 6y ago
  It actually is, well in university it is. Not sure about college.
- guerrilla 6y ago
  Thank you. That makes much more sense to me. I found this[1] video with an efficient explanation and visualization. [1]. https://youtu.be/Ziz7t1HHwBw https://youtu.be/Ziz7t1HHwBw

by avalys 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

mhh__ 6y ago

That's because it's really hard to explain physics to non-physicists without using mathematics. The clever part isn't classifying the orbitals, it's finding the Schrodinger equation in the first place. We knew electrons had wavelike properties, but what equation did they obey? Even with hindsight it's still a difficult thing to derive - the relativistic answer is actually wrong, for example. You reach the truism because the equations take years to learn - in engineering you can just take the result and run but in physics you have to be careful to understand what you're doing. The Schrodinger equation for hydrogen isn't that difficult to solve (try it), but conveying that process in English is difficult.

vertbhrtn 6y ago
My understanding of QM is very naive, but Schrodinger equation seems really simple to me. I could probably even explain it to a 5 year old. I'd show a few pictures of standing waves on a drum surface: the first two energy levels create simple shapes, higher levels create more sophisticated shapes. Then I'd say that an electron is such a wave. Then I'd introduce the idea of electric potential: I'd put a heavy thing in the center and say that this is how the atom's nucleus warps the electric field; and this changes the wave patterns somewhat, but the idea remains the same. Then I'd say that often multiple standing waves mix together and we get a quasipattern that oscillates between a few standing waves. That's really it.

aeternum 6y ago

You're right. The way to explain it intuitively is that at the quantum scale all particles are wavelike. In order for electrons to achieve stability (such as within an atom), they must create a standing wave. Similar to the notes on a guitar string, each electron orbital is simply a harmonic. The complication comes from the fact that atoms are 3d, so instead you need to use spherical harmonics, but it's the same principle, just standing waves in 3d space. These should look familiar if you've seen rendered images of electron clouds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_harmonics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_harmonics It is quite surprising that this intuition is basically never taught in classrooms.

pinopinopino 6y ago
It actually is, well in university it is. Not sure about college.
guerrilla 6y ago
Thank you. That makes much more sense to me. I found this[1] video with an efficient explanation and visualization. [1]. https://youtu.be/Ziz7t1HHwBw https://youtu.be/Ziz7t1HHwBw