Register to reply

Is the atomic structure correct

by magus
Tags: atomic, correct, structure
Share this thread:
magus
#1
Nov5-03, 07:15 PM
P: 11
ive recently been reading about the string theory and
of course learned that it is attempting to unify the forces.
for a while now i have had an idea that its unlikely that
matter could actually have multiple quantum forces and by
eliminating two potentially unnessecary forces (weak and strong
nuclear forces)leaving electromagnet force (simple plus and negative)
and einstiens conception of gravity might make this unification
simpler... my reasoning for this is that maybe the atom is not
structured like the typical conception... (proton,nuetron center,
electron cloud)... take light photons for example, it is nuetral
until a higher energy particle collides with it then it breaks into
two oppositely charged particles. this little fact is what provoked my
idea.... maybe the atom is actually just positive and negatively charged particles that are not structured as typically thought however they are intertwined, (nuetrons are just the fusion of the two particles). if atoms are indeed structured by an evenly distribution of particles then this hypothisezed "nuclear force" would not be nessecary would it? this is just a little idea i had and would like if anyone reading this could input there idea and other facts or problems with this because i would like to have this idea thouroughly discussed.. maybe someone can give me some ideas..

thx to those who respond.
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Physical constant is constant even in strong gravitational fields
Physicists provide new insights into the world of quantum materials
Nuclear spins control current in plastic LED: Step toward quantum computing, spintronic memory, better displays
Ambitwistor
#2
Nov5-03, 09:42 PM
P: 837
You seem to be describing something roughly like Thompson's "plum pudding" model of the atom (an amorphous blob of positive charge with some negative charges strewn throughout). But we have known since Rutherford's scattering experiments that the positive charges in an atom are concentrated into a very small space in the center of the atom, not evenly distributed throughout. For that matter, we are able to isolate nuclei in the laboratory and study them. In accelerators we can study the strong and weak nuclear interactions between individual particles, too, and they do not behave like the electromagnetic force. Finally, we have extremely detailed measurements of the shape of the nucleus and of the electronic orbitals around it.

I'm sorry to say it, but your kind of atomic model has not been tenable for about a hundred years.
ahrkron
#3
Nov6-03, 12:05 AM
Emeritus
PF Gold
P: 734
I would add that weak and strong forces were invented precisely because there was no other way of describing certain experiments.

For instance, if there existed only gravity and electromagnetism, why would a neutron decay into a proton, an electron and an antineutrino (which all isolated neutrons do after some minutes) since, in that case, the only two forces among electron and proton would be atractive?

As Ambitwistor mentioned, the behavior of the strong and weak interactions has been well measured, and the model we have for them works beautifully up to the accuracy we can reach today in accellerators.

String theory (or any other attempt at grand unification) needs to reproduce this structure (i.e., four distinct forces in this range of energies).

magus
#4
Nov6-03, 02:17 PM
P: 11
Is the atomic structure correct

well thx for the info... im still in high school and just had an idea
and figured that you all could give me a push in some direction. do you have any info on nuclear forces that i could enllighten myself with.
Ambitwistor
#5
Nov6-03, 02:32 PM
P: 837
Unfortunately, there is a real lack of non-technical information on the nuclear forces. I suppose your best bet is just to piece things together from whatever you can find on Google.
chroot
#6
Nov6-03, 03:00 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
chroot's Avatar
P: 10,427
How about www.particleadventure.org?

- Warren
magus
#7
Nov6-03, 05:44 PM
P: 11
k thx. im about to search
magus
#8
Nov6-03, 05:49 PM
P: 11
"For instance, if there existed only gravity and electromagnetism, why would a neutron decay into a proton" --arkron

could it be possible that nuetrons and nuetrinos only decay due to high energy inercourses?
magus
#9
Nov6-03, 06:28 PM
P: 11
forgot to put this on my reply.... light photons break down like this?
Ambitwistor
#10
Nov6-03, 09:05 PM
P: 837
Originally posted by magus
could it be possible that nuetrons and nuetrinos only decay due to high energy inercourses?
What does that mean?

Neutrons decay at rest, without being accelerated to high energies or anything, and without interacting with any other high-energy particles. Neutrinos do not decay, as far as we know. (Neither do photons.)
magus
#11
Nov8-03, 05:12 PM
P: 11
ok, im put to rest


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Atomic Structure Advanced Physics Homework 0
Atomic structure Chemistry 9
Atomic structure Quantum Physics 1
Atomic structure General Physics 0
Atomic structure General Physics 1