3 ms·
There are orbitals[0], but they're not so nicely circular like in that "atomic" atom that dominated from the 1950's. Each energy level has a different shape.
by irjustin 6y ago
There are orbitals[0], but they're not so nicely circular like in that "atomic" atom that dominated from the 1950's.
Each energy level has a different shape.
Also, they don't 'orbit' like planets. It's now a probability space[1]. i.e. You will _likely_ find electrons in this 'orbital' somewhere, but could be anywhere.... but you have to go looking for them. Once you've found them, they're instantly somewhere else in a completely unknown area of that orbital.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital#Shapes_of_orbitals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital#Shapes_of_orbit...
- jiggawatts 6y ago> instantly somewhere else in a completely unknown area of that orbital. Mr Einstein may have a few words to say about that.
- alblue 6y agoHe would probably say “you are right; the Heisenberg uncertainty principle means that you cannot know both the electrons position and momentum exactly due to quantum uncertainty”
- Viliam1234 6y agoI think the momentum is still limited by the speed of light.
- MichaelBurge 6y agoSo if you measured in succession fast enough, the particles would move continuously. So the probability density should be time-dependent.
- Viliam1234 6y agoContinuously, but always in a new unpredictable direction, i.e. Brownian motion. And I suppose if you keep measuring them fast enough, so much disturbance will kick them off the atom, so they are no longer in the shell. The shell is what happens when the electrons are left alone. (Not completely sure about this part.)