4 ms·

Had there been any scientific studies into why the elements are perfect and there are are all apparent to perfect replicas with not defect rates? It’s hard to m

Had there been any scientific studies into why the elements are perfect and there are are all apparent to perfect replicas with not defect rates? It’s hard to make perfect replicas at scales higher than the atomic scale but at the lowest levels, everything seems to be identical.

cjameskeller 3y ago
Couldn't one say that different isotopes of elements are exactly such "imperfect" replicas?
- dexwiz 3y ago
  Isotopes and elements are human made labels based on nucleon and proton counts. Hydrogen and deuterium are both the same element, but are obviously different nuclear structures. Even at a chemical level deuterium is appreciably different. That difference between isotopes and elements diminishes but never disappears as atomic mass rises. Isotopes are only imperfect in the context of one labeling system. But not from a quantum viewpoint.
- mr_toad 3y ago
  The isotopes are examples of why atoms are not really atomic at all. Once something that you thought was atomic actually shows variation you begin to suspect it is composed of smaller things.
jmole 3y ago
I'm not a physicist, but isn't this 'everything is identical' model fundamentally incompatible with quantum mechanics? There seems to be hidden quantum state encoded within the proton and other subatomic particles, although that state may not be relevant to the interactions that we care about on a day to day basis. Your comment does remind me of this though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe If we are not in a one-electron universe, every electron is unique in the sense that it has an entirely unique path though spacetime, and thus can't be identical. I think what you mean is that every one of these "particles" seems to obey the same set of laws, which is not something that's unique to atoms, subatomic particles, or even larger things like molecules.
- drdeca 3y ago
  > isn't this 'everything is identical' model fundamentally incompatible with quantum mechanics? No, quite the opposite, actually. Some particles being identical is core to many quantum mechanical ideas. The distinction between Bosons and Fermions fundamentally relies on this idea. Also, it probably isn’t true that all electrons have individual well-defined paths through spacetime. Electrons are Fermions. When two electrons are “in orbit” around a helium nucleus, with the atom including the electrons being in the lowest energy state, the two electrons are orbitals distinguished by their spin, but, at least if it were not for the interaction with the magnetic interaction from the spin of the nucleus, you could choose any axis along which to consider the spin direction of the electrons, and like, you would get for each of the two spin directions along that axis, one of the electrons would have its spin in that direction. But considering different axiis for the spin, you would be splitting the two up in different ways? I’m fairly confident it isn’t possible to assign a consistent id for each electron which persists through time. (Even setting aside the “they don’t have well-defined positions” aspect)

cjameskeller 3y ago

Couldn't one say that different isotopes of elements are exactly such "imperfect" replicas?

dexwiz 3y ago
Isotopes and elements are human made labels based on nucleon and proton counts. Hydrogen and deuterium are both the same element, but are obviously different nuclear structures. Even at a chemical level deuterium is appreciably different. That difference between isotopes and elements diminishes but never disappears as atomic mass rises. Isotopes are only imperfect in the context of one labeling system. But not from a quantum viewpoint.
mr_toad 3y ago
The isotopes are examples of why atoms are not really atomic at all. Once something that you thought was atomic actually shows variation you begin to suspect it is composed of smaller things.

jmole 3y ago

I'm not a physicist, but isn't this 'everything is identical' model fundamentally incompatible with quantum mechanics? There seems to be hidden quantum state encoded within the proton and other subatomic particles, although that state may not be relevant to the interactions that we care about on a day to day basis. Your comment does remind me of this though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe If we are not in a one-electron universe, every electron is unique in the sense that it has an entirely unique path though spacetime, and thus can't be identical. I think what you mean is that every one of these "particles" seems to obey the same set of laws, which is not something that's unique to atoms, subatomic particles, or even larger things like molecules.

drdeca 3y ago
> isn't this 'everything is identical' model fundamentally incompatible with quantum mechanics? No, quite the opposite, actually. Some particles being identical is core to many quantum mechanical ideas. The distinction between Bosons and Fermions fundamentally relies on this idea. Also, it probably isn’t true that all electrons have individual well-defined paths through spacetime. Electrons are Fermions. When two electrons are “in orbit” around a helium nucleus, with the atom including the electrons being in the lowest energy state, the two electrons are orbitals distinguished by their spin, but, at least if it were not for the interaction with the magnetic interaction from the spin of the nucleus, you could choose any axis along which to consider the spin direction of the electrons, and like, you would get for each of the two spin directions along that axis, one of the electrons would have its spin in that direction. But considering different axiis for the spin, you would be splitting the two up in different ways? I’m fairly confident it isn’t possible to assign a consistent id for each electron which persists through time. (Even setting aside the “they don’t have well-defined positions” aspect)