Frustrated about electrons and touching.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lance Fernandes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electrons
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of "touching" at the microscopic level, specifically addressing the forces involved, such as the Pauli Exclusion Principle and Van der Waals forces. Participants clarify that "touching" occurs when these forces balance out. The complexity of the underlying physics is acknowledged, with a suggestion that a deeper understanding requires advanced mathematics. The original poster expresses gratitude for the clarification and acknowledges their initial confusion. The conversation concludes with a focus on sticking to foundational concepts for better comprehension.
Lance Fernandes
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I know there's been loads of discussion about this everywhere, but- why don't we touch things at the microscopic(or quantum, whatever) level? I know that it has to do with the Pauli Exclusion Principle, and the Van der Walls force- but- could i just get a plain clear( i know what I'm asking for is near impossible) answer to this? And I've already watched the Sixty Symbols video with Prof. Moriarty. Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Lance.

Why won't you start by defining what you mean by 'touching'. It'll help us see how to address the source of your confusion.
 
Lance Fernandes said:
And I've already watched the Sixty Symbols video with Prof. Moriarty.

That video is very clear.

We have two competing forces when objects get close together - Van der Waals attraction and repulsion caused by the Pauli Exclusion Principle. When they balance its called touching.

Its very straight forward - don't quite see what your issue is.

The only issue is why do those forces come about in the first place. That however is quite advanced (especially the force from the Pauli Exclusion Principle which took a very great mathematical physicist - Dyson - to work out) requiring a sojourn into advanced mathematics beyond what I suspect your current level is. At the beginner level simply accept they exist.

Thanks
Bill
 
Hey, and thanks. I should've thought twice before posing such a meaningless and somewhat aggressive question. My doubts have been cleared, I've paid more attention to that video. I've got the basics- and I think I'll stick to the basics for now. A big THANKS! :)
 
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...

Similar threads

Back
Top