Every known element has a unique atom?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the uniqueness of atoms, specifically how different elements can have distinct properties despite being composed of the same fundamental particles (protons, neutrons, and electrons). Participants explore the implications of atomic structure, the role of protons in defining elements, and the nature of isotopes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about how atoms can be unique when they are made of the same types of particles, questioning the distinction between different atoms.
  • Others clarify that the uniqueness of an atom arises from the number of protons and neutrons it contains, which affects its chemical properties.
  • A participant mentions that the arrangement of electrons around the nucleus is crucial in determining the chemical behavior of an element.
  • There is a discussion about isotopes, where participants note that isotopes of an element have the same number of protons but different numbers of neutrons, leading to different nuclear properties.
  • One participant emphasizes that while particles like protons and quarks are indistinguishable, they are distinct entities within an atom, contributing to its identity.
  • Another participant points out that early models of atomic structure may not accurately represent the complexities of atomic behavior.
  • There is mention of quantum mechanics in relation to atomic orbitals and their probabilistic nature, though this point is less developed in the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the number of protons is fundamental to defining an element, but there is ongoing debate about the implications of atomic structure and the nature of particles. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the deeper understanding of atomic uniqueness and the role of quarks.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about atomic structure and the implications of indistinguishable particles. The discussion touches on complex concepts such as isotopes and quantum mechanics, but these are not fully resolved or clarified.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in atomic theory, chemistry, and the foundational concepts of physics related to the structure of matter.

Niaboc67
Messages
249
Reaction score
3
This notion perplexes me. Could I please have this explain with an example(s). I am confused are atoms not made up of the same protons and neutrons which are just essentially negatively or positively charged particles which are made of quarks? Which as confusing as that can become. How can one atom be unique from the others when they are made of the same negatively and positively charged particles?

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Niaboc67 said:
How can one atom be unique from the others when they are made of the same negatively and positively charged particles?

The key here is to understand that each particle is indistinguishable from any other particle of an identical type. In other words, all protons are indistinguishable from all other protons, and all down quarks are indistinguishable from all other down quarks. This just means that if we do an experiment, say to measure some value such as mass or charge, we get the same measured values no matter which particle we measure. All protons have identical mass, charge, etc, and all down quarks have identical mass, charge, etc.

Now, just because two particles may be indistinguishable does not mean that they aren't distinct, separate objects. A proton in my hand is not the same proton that's in my cup.
 
Drakkith said:
The key here is to understand that each particle is indistinguishable from any other particle of an identical type. In other words, all protons are indistinguishable from all other protons, and all down quarks are indistinguishable from all other down quarks. This just means that if we do an experiment, say to measure some value such as mass or charge, we get the same measured values no matter which particle we measure. All protons have identical mass, charge, etc, and all down quarks have identical mass, charge, etc.

Now, just because two particles may be indistinguishable does not mean that they aren't distinct, separate objects. A proton in my hand is not the same proton that's in my cup.

I understand that particles are indistinguishable but how can they be of different types? If as you said all protons are indistinguishable from other protons and same with quarks. Therefore, they are all the same things. How can anything be any different from each other? Where is the distinction made or how can there be? How does an atom become distinct maybe is a better why of phrasing this, if indeed they are all the same underneath it all.
 
Niaboc67 said:
How does an atom become distinct maybe is a better why of phrasing this, if indeed they are all the same underneath it all.

The atom as a whole object becomes distinct from other atoms based on the number of particles making it up. With different numbers of protons and neutrons, the atoms no longer behave identically. The number of protons directly determines the number of electrons the atom can attract, which then determines the different chemical properties we see from each element.
 
I wonder if what he is asking is: how are nitrogen and oxygen so different if they are both made of protons, neutrons and electrons.

The answer is that the number of protons has a direct effect on the number of electrons. It is the number electrons (and placement) that is the basis for all chemistry.
 
Niaboc67 said:
This notion perplexes me. Could I please have this explain with an example(s). I am confused are atoms not made up of the same protons and neutrons which are just essentially negatively or positively charged particles which are made of quarks? Which as confusing as that can become. How can one atom be unique from the others when they are made of the same negatively and positively charged particles?

Thank you
Is one familiar with the periodic table? The periodic table arranges elements according to similar chemical properties, which are based on the number of electrons in the atoms of a particular element. The nature of an element is determined by the number of protons in the nucleus. Elements have isotopes, which means nuclei with the same number protons, but different numbers of neutrons in the nucleus. While the chemical properties of isotopes are similar or more or less the same, the nuclear properties are different.

In general, atoms tend to be neutral, with the number of electrons equaling the number of protons in the nucleus. Electrons occupy particular energy levels, and the outermost (valence) electrons determine the chemical properties.

Some nuclei are stable, i.e., over time, the nucleus remains unchanged. Some nuclei have a deficiency or excess of neutrons in relation to the protons, and such nuclei can be radioactive, i.e., the nucleus with change through beta decay or positron emission, or electron capture, or in some cases, for the heaviest nuclei, by alpha decay.
 
Niaboc67 said:
This notion perplexes me. Could I please have this explain with an example(s). I am confused are atoms not made up of the same protons and neutrons which are just essentially negatively or positively charged particles which are made of quarks? Which as confusing as that can become. How can one atom be unique from the others when they are made of the same negatively and positively charged particles?

Thank you

I think you are getting confused because you don't understand atomic structure.

An atom is made up of a nucleus, which can contain one or more protons (positively charged), and zero or more neutrons (no charge). Outside the nucleus, there is a group of much lighter particles called electrons (negatively charged).

Early models of the atom had the electrons orbiting the nucleus, much as planets orbit the sun, but later research has shown that those early models don't accurately reflect the true structure of the atom. The orbital paradigm persists because it simplifies the teaching of elementary chemistry.

Each element contains a unique number of protons in its nucleus. Hydrogen is the simplest element, because its nucleus contains just one proton. Helium is next, with two protons, all the way up to uranium with 92 protons. The number of protons in the nucleus of an atom is also called the atomic number.

The nucleus of an atom may also contain a certain number of neutrons. If two atoms of an element contain different numbers of neutrons in the nucleus, then you have different isotopes of the same element. For example, hydrogen has three isotopes: H1 contains a single proton in the nucleus, H2 contains a proton and a neutron, and H3 contains a proton and two neutrons. These are all forms of hydrogen because each nucleus has only one proton.

The chemical properties of an element are determined by the arrangement of the electrons surrounding the nucleus. The electrons arrange themselves in a certain order, depending on their total number. Each atom of an element contains the same number of electrons as it has protons in the nucleus. The number of electrons in the outermost positions determine if an element is very reactive (like sodium or potassium) or relatively inert (like lead).

All atoms of hydrogen will react chemically in the same way. All atoms of lead will react chemically in the same way. Lead and hydrogen will react differently chemically, because the arrangement of electrons is different in lead from the arrangement of electrons in hydrogen.

Things like quarks play no role in the chemistry of an atom, beyond making up the protons and any neutrons in the nucleus. Quarks are thought to be the constituent parts of protons, neutrons, and other subatomic particles.
 
Last edited:
Niaboc67 said:
How can one atom be unique from the others when they are made of the same negatively and positively charged particles?

What Steamking said. It's the number and arrangement of these particles that affects their chemical properties..

 
Nice presentation. Just realize the atomic orbitals don't exist quantumly until they are located classically, in respect to the "orbital shell". Quantum probability "expands" per "orbital" level?
 
  • #10
Drakkith said:
A proton in my hand is ...
Uh, huh. You've been playing with your protons again, I see.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: e.bar.goum and Drakkith
  • #11
My bike and my car are made from exactly the same elements (and effectively from exactly the same elementary particles) yet they are completely different. Why would you expect them to be identical?
 
  • #12
Niaboc67 said:
I understand that particles are indistinguishable but how can they be of different types? If as you said all protons are indistinguishable from other protons and same with quarks. Therefore, they are all the same things. How can anything be any different from each other? Where is the distinction made or how can there be? How does an atom become distinct maybe is a better why of phrasing this, if indeed they are all the same underneath it all.
You should not get involved with Quarks until you are much firmer on Classical Atomic Theory. All that was sorted out very satisfactorily, long before the structure of Neutrons and Protons was understood to the level it is today.
A thought for Christmas, with which you can impress your friends: Did you know that the word 'Isotope' comes from the Greek words for Same and Place. (i.e. the same place in the periodic table)? It's the place in the periodic table that governs how an atom will behave chemically. Effects of the small differences in atomic masses are very much more subtle that what other atoms they will combine with.
 
  • #13
jerromyjon said:
Nice presentation. Just realize the atomic orbitals don't exist quantumly until they are located classically, in respect to the "orbital shell". Quantum probability "expands" per "orbital" level?
Just saying but any process at a subatomic level such as electron orbitals is by definition a quantum process for example they undergo quantum leaps when they change energy levels, electrons also follow a particle/wave duality. I hope this sheds some light on a physical chemistry perspective for you
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
903
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K