How can an atom have a negative charge?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter erocored
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atom Charge Negative
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of how an atom can acquire a negative charge by gaining extra electrons. It explores the forces involved in holding these electrons to a neutral atom, the stability of negative ions, and the quantum mechanical implications of electron interactions.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the nucleus's positive charge attracts additional electrons while the existing electrons repel them, leading to a balance of forces that can hold an extra electron.
  • Others argue that the electric force from the nucleus is only partially shielded by the electrons, allowing an additional electron to still feel attraction at close ranges.
  • A later reply questions whether the resulting forces acting on the additional electron from the protons and electrons in the atom would cancel out.
  • Some participants suggest that the stability of negative ions is lower than that of neutral atoms, making them more reactive.
  • There is a discussion about the complexity of accurately modeling electron interactions, with some noting that quantum mechanics is necessary for understanding these interactions.
  • One participant mentions that while the hydrogen atom has a closed solution, more complex atoms require numerical solutions and do not have straightforward analytical solutions.
  • There is a debate about the nature of electron interactions, with some asserting that electrons do not "knock into" each other due to their repulsive forces, while others challenge this view by discussing the wave functions of electrons in atomic orbitals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the forces acting on additional electrons, the nature of electron interactions, and the modeling of these systems. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached on several points.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the complexity of accurately modeling electron interactions, the dependence on quantum mechanical principles, and the unresolved nature of certain mathematical steps in the discussion.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying atomic physics, quantum mechanics, or chemistry, particularly in understanding electron behavior and atomic structure.

erocored
Messages
30
Reaction score
7
I have a neutral charged atom. When I bring an electron to this atom what the force will hold this electron with neutral atom?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What kind of force hold extra electrons with neutral charged atom?
 
If an atom were a neutral particle, no force would work on the electron. An atom is made of nucleus with positive charge and electrons of negative charge. The nucleus attracts and the electrons repulse the additional electron. By the balance of these forces the atom may hold the additional electron. Quantum mechanics gives more details.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: erocored
anuttarasammyak said:
If an atom were a neutral particle, no force would work on the electron. An atom is made of nucleus with positive charge and electrons of negative charge. The nucleus attracts and the electrons repulse the additional electron. By the balance of these forces the atom may hold the additional electron. Quantum mechanics gives more details.
Does the resulting force that act on the electron from the protons and electrons of the atom is zero?
 
The electric force from the nucleus. The very short, very abridged explanation is that the positive charge of the nucleus is, at very close ranges, only partially shielded by the electrons. So an electron can still feel an attraction at very close range to a neutral atom.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: erocored
Drakkith said:
the positive charge of the nucleus is, at very close ranges, only partially shielded by the electrons.
How much partially shielded?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur
No, because they are distributed in different positions in the atom, their forces on the additional electron do not cancel.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi and erocored
Good question - you'd think that 10 protons would only hold 10 electrons BUT a very simple model of electrons buzzing round a positive nucleus would suggest that the 'extra' electron you refer to is nearer to the attractive force from the positive nucleus than to the repulsive force of the electrons on the other side - so overall it is attracted.
Note - negative ions are not as stable as neutron atoms so they react easily with any positive ions that happen to be around or even just lose that electron.

Basically it's all harder than it may seem at first so you can't rely on initial and intuitive conclusions about this. (Or any Science, for that matter.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: erocored
sophiecentaur said:
or even just lose that electron.
Do you mean that one of the additional electrons can be knocked out by the others in any point of time?
 
  • #10
I think that's taking an already much-too mechanical model one step too far. Of course, electrons don't 'knock into' each other because the repulsive force between two charges would be too great for them to get that close.

Edit - but bound electrons really don't behave like particles anyway.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: erocored
  • #11
anuttarasammyak said:
If an atom were a neutral particle, no force would work on the electron. An atom is made of nucleus with positive charge and electrons of negative charge. The nucleus attracts and the electrons repulse the additional electron. By the balance of these forces the atom may hold the additional electron. Quantum mechanics gives more details.
Most simple details:
Most dielectrics are polarizable and form a dipole moment that attracts a charge when influenced by the charge.
Indeed, consider nucleus, electron and the extra electron.
In absence of the extra electron, the first electron would be located on the average at the same place as the nucleus. The first electron would orbit away from the nucleus, but if, say, second electron is very far away and has negligible effect then the first electron is equally likely to be in any direction from nucleus.
If, however, the second electron is closer then the second electron attracts the nucleus and repels the first electron. The result is that the first electron is more distant from the second electron than the nucleus is.
Therefore while the charges of first electron and nucleus exactly cancel, their forces to the second electron do not - the repulsion of first electron to second electron is necessarily weaker than the attraction to nucleus, because the second electron is farther, because the force to second electron is repulsion.

Now if the second electron and the atom were not quantum mechanical particles, or had a large mass, they would always be bound by the induced dipole attraction, no matter how feeble.
Since electrons are quantum mechanical and have a small mass, they can be bound to neutral atoms when the attraction is strong enough, but not when it is weaker.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Keith_McClary and erocored
  • #12
erocored said:
How much partially shielded?

I don't know to be honest. I think the answer is very complicated and requires large amounts of computational power to model accurately.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur and erocored
  • #13
Drakkith said:
I don't know to be honest. I think the answer is very complicated and requires large amounts of computational power to model accurately.
On that scale there is no satisfactory alternative to a QM approach. I could mention that considering the Potential Energy in the system is probably the better approach over dealing with the forces. Only at large distances is the Electric Potential of the nucleus equal to the EP of the electrons so there is no simple ‘cancellation’ near the atom.
 
  • #14
Moderator's Note: Two nearly identical threads have been merged. (For better or worse.)
 
  • #15
sophiecentaur said:
On that scale there is no satisfactory alternative to a QM approach.

I was under the impression that even a QM approach still required large amounts of computational power to accurately model anything other than a hydrogen atom.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur
  • #16
You can do two electrons (e.g. H-, He, Li+) without too much trouble.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur and Drakkith
  • #17
Drakkith said:
I was under the impression that even a QM approach still required large amounts of computational power to accurately model anything other than a hydrogen atom.
The H atom is the only one with a 'closed' solution, afaik. Beyond that involves numerical solutions. There would seem to be very little point, though, in spending massive effort on a quasi mechanical calculation, which is what my earlier post didn't make clear. The concept of 'shielding' doesn't fit into it except as an arm waving justification that the two ideas don' actually clash too much.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Drakkith
  • #18
sophiecentaur said:
The H atom is the only one with a 'closed' solution, afaik

That is correct. Note that He (or H-) is a three body problem and there doesn't even exist a classical solution.

That said, one can get pretty close - qualitatively correct and quantitative to 5 or so percent - using only grad school level methods. Qualitatively, you have an electron orbiting a dipole. Unfortunately, that doesn't have a closed form solution either.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur and Drakkith
  • #19
As a chemist, an atom may add an extra electron(s) to fill its valence shell. False question as naked ions only exist in very high vacuum.
 
  • #20
sophiecentaur said:
I think that's taking an already much-too mechanical model one step too far. Of course, electrons don't 'knock into' each other because the repulsive force between two charges would be too great for them to get that close.

Edit - but bound electrons really don't behave like particles anyway.
Electrons, according to quantum chemistry, have wave function related to their atomic orbitals. Actually the electrons largely overlap each other when in nuclear orbitals. There is no repulsive force between electrons, other than two electrons with identical spin can't occupy the same orbital. Atoms with partially filled shell/orbitals can accept an electron in that orbital.
 
  • #21
shjacks45 said:
There is no repulsive force between electrons, other than two electrons with identical spin can't occupy the same orbital.

I'm not sure this is correct. My understanding was that the atomic orbital changes when you add another electron due to their mutual repulsion, which is why an exact solution to the Schrödinger equation only exists for atoms with a single electron.
 
  • #22
shjacks45 said:
There is no repulsive force between electrons
There is, just like between all other particles with the same type of electric charge.
shjacks45 said:
False question as naked ions only exist in very high vacuum.
I'm not sure what you mean by "naked ions" but free ions (not bound in molecules) exist in high density places, too.
 
  • #23
shjacks45 said:
There is no repulsive force between electrons,
I have to disagree with that, too. All the fields around all the particles in an atom are equally relevant. surely the idea of the so-called 'shielding' of the outer electrons cn be explained in terms of 'repulsive forces'.
It is very important not to get too mechanical about how the atom works, though. Bound electrons do not behave as if they have 'motion', as in a low density beam.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
904
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K