4 ms·
I want to make sure I understand. Atoms are not empty space, they are a solid cloud of...something?
by krupan 3y ago
I want to make sure I understand. Atoms are not empty space, they are a solid cloud of...something?
- sudosysgen 3y agoThey are a fuzzy cloud of potential particle existence.
- paulddraper 3y agoClouds of particles. Smeared matter, thanks to QM
- ekianjo 3y agoDoes not change the fact its still mostly empty
- paulddraper 3y agoSure, but that's the authors argument
- akvadrako 3y agoWhat do you mean by empty? Every point in the atom contains some of the smeared electron, it's just low density, less than 1 electron mass per electron radius.
- raincole 3y agoAtoms are not empty. They're full of potential!
- archgoon 3y ago[dead]
- dwattttt 3y agoIs it empty except for a few bits, or is every bit of space "mostly empty"?
- akomtu 3y agoThe collective scientific thought is slowly migrating from seeings atoms as billiard tables to seeing atoms as cups of tea, with a stable wave pattern due to vibration, and a vortex in the middle to represent the nucleus. What the tea is made of is not a concern yet, only the shape of its surface.
- romusha 3y ago[flagged]
- irrational 3y agoBut, what about everything under the surface down to the bottom of the cup? What shape is the cup? Does the vortex reach to the bottom of the cup? If I could look down the vortex, would I see the bottom of the cup?
- akomtu 3y agoPhysics is nowhere near experimenting with such things. Metaphysics has a rather interesting belief that electrons are the smallest 3d particles and look like inflow sinks, positrons are correspondingly outflow sinks, and the flow is made of much smaller 4d particles, that are, upon closer inspection, appear to be similarly made of combining tiny inflows and outflows of 5d particles and so on.
- Ekaros 3y agoMy take is that "empty" is not a meaningful term when talking about scale of atoms and molecules.