Recognitions:
Gold Member

## energy types

 Quote by mather the energy of the atom (ie. the potential energy between electrons and protons, the kinetic energy of electrons, etc), will be transfered to the environment, because of the second thermodynamics law that's why the atom will simply decay
mather, when you make statements like the above you must be prepared to provide some accepted sicientific evidence. In this case, you have provided none, only your own statement, "because of the second thermodynamics law." But that's not enough. You must explain the mechanism or process.

Cheers,
Bobbywhy

Recognitions:
Gold Member
 Quote by mather I think they wont be able to interact, if they are seperated in such a huge distance their electrostatic fields have some finite diameter, havent they?
No, the EM field has infinite range.

 Quote by Drakkith If we separate a proton and an electron by a HUGE distance in an empty universe, they will have maximum potential energy.
this is wrong:

potential energy is inversely (and not directly) dependent upon distance

so in a distance near infinite, the potential energy will nears zero

isn't, then, there, a point where the potential energy will be less than the energy of a possible interaction?

 Quote by mather this is wrong: potential energy is inversely (and not directly) dependent upon distance so in a distance near infinite, the potential energy will nears zero isn't, then, there, a point where the potential energy will be less than the energy of a possible interaction?
You should be more careful with your labels of "wrong".
The fact that the potential energy is zero at infinite is a matter of choosing the reference point but it is the usual choice . The fact that it decreases when the distance decreases is independent of the reference point. Then how can the zero value be a maximum? What values are less than zero?

Recognitions:
Gold Member
 Quote by mather this is wrong:
It is not wrong. For attracting particles the greater the separation the greater the potential energy. You may be getting this mixed up with potential which by convention is taken to be zero at an infinite separation.

 Quote by Dadface It is not wrong. For attracting particles the greater the separation the greater the potential energy. You may be getting this mixed up with potential which by convention is taken to be zero at an infinite separation.
I am talking about electrostatic potential energy:

 Quote by mather I am talking about electrostatic potential energy:
Everyone here does too, I suppose.
Not put q1=e and q2=-e.
What happens with W when r decreases?
 okay, but doesnt this prove you wrong?

I suppose you forgot your own words:

 Quote by mather I am talking about electrostatic potential energy:
Your plot does not show that.

 Quote by nasu I suppose you forgot your own words: Your plot does not show that.
you mean that dissociation energy has nothing to do with electrostatical potential energy?

 Quote by mather you mean that dissociation energy has nothing to do with electrostatical potential energy?
"has nothing to do" is a little too vague.
Let's put it this way: the Morse potential is not the electrostatic potential mentioned in your previous post. It contains a repulsive term which becomes very large at close approach. This term is not part of the electrostatic potential energy.
The distinction between the attractive, electrostatic, term and the repulsive terms is easier to see if you look at another common potential function, the Lenard-Jones potential.

However the energy at large distance (infinite) is higher than the energy in the bound state (minimum of the potential).
What was actually the problem?