- #1
euclideanspace
- 22
- 0
This question is directed at resident theoretical electron physicists in PF
Regarding suborbitals L 0 I → L 0 VII corresponding to Periods 1 - 7
There are a total of 14 electron positions within Azimuthal Quantum Energy State 0 in Periods 1 through 7
Additionally, given that Azimuthal Quantum State 0 represents a 0° orbital plane angle along an x-z axis,
and a limit of 1 electron pair per L 0 suborbital;
This would then require 7 discrete coaxial suborbital paths for L 0 without violating the Pauli exclusion principle.
Figure 1 illustrates 7 coaxial L 0 suborbital paths and 14 electron standing wave positions,
numbered L 0 I → L 0 VII, with 4 electron pairs aligned along the z axis and 3 electron pairs aligned along the x axis.
Question 1 : Are the x-z axis suborbital paths shown in Figure 1 in agreement with the current standard model?
Question 2 : Are the electron standing wave positions shown in Figure 1 in agreement with the current standard model?
(assuming the answer to Question 1 is Yes).
Thanks in advance
~ E:S
Regarding suborbitals L 0 I → L 0 VII corresponding to Periods 1 - 7
There are a total of 14 electron positions within Azimuthal Quantum Energy State 0 in Periods 1 through 7
Additionally, given that Azimuthal Quantum State 0 represents a 0° orbital plane angle along an x-z axis,
and a limit of 1 electron pair per L 0 suborbital;
This would then require 7 discrete coaxial suborbital paths for L 0 without violating the Pauli exclusion principle.
Figure 1 illustrates 7 coaxial L 0 suborbital paths and 14 electron standing wave positions,
numbered L 0 I → L 0 VII, with 4 electron pairs aligned along the z axis and 3 electron pairs aligned along the x axis.
Question 1 : Are the x-z axis suborbital paths shown in Figure 1 in agreement with the current standard model?
Question 2 : Are the electron standing wave positions shown in Figure 1 in agreement with the current standard model?
(assuming the answer to Question 1 is Yes).
Thanks in advance
~ E:S
Attachments
Last edited: