Interatomic spacing concept confusion

Click For Summary
Interatomic spacing refers to the distance between atoms in a material, which can vary based on the type of atomic arrangement. The initial confusion arises from different representations of atoms in diagrams. While some images depict atoms as closely packed, others show them with noticeable gaps, reflecting their interatomic distance. Atoms are not solid objects; they interact through the electron cloud, and this interaction diminishes with distance. The concept of atomic radius complicates the understanding of spacing, as it is derived from the distance between neighboring atom centers, divided by two. Although this suggests a close packing, atoms do not have a defined surface and do not "touch" like solid spheres. Instead, they experience attractive and repulsive forces that maintain their positions within a crystal lattice, leading to the observed interatomic spacing. This understanding is crucial for calculations involving density in unit cells, as it accounts for both occupied and vacant space in atomic arrangements.
engineering810
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I am trying to understand the concept of interatomic spacing. Below is a link to three pictures, and my questions is: why are they different? I thought atoms were packed together touching each other like in the first picture but the second and third imply otherwise. Any explanation or help is appreciated as I have been trying to find the answer for hours on end now. Thank you for any help in advance!

http://s1300.photobucket.com/user/waveriderr810/library/
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
engineering810 said:
but the second and third imply otherwise
How so?
 
Bystander said:
How so?

In the second and third pictures the atoms appear to be spaced out and have space in between them, which represents their interatomic distance. Aren't atoms all packed together therefore there would be no spacing between them?
 
Atoms are not hard billiard balls. They interact via the charge from the electron shell. This charge drops off with distance.
When diagramming an atom, it is arbitrary how large you make the sphere, since it has no real-world counterpart.
How one represents atoms in a diagram is a matter of taste and of clarity.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Atoms are not hard billiard balls. They interact via the charge from the electron shell. This charge drops off with distance.
When diagramming an atom, it is arbitrary how large you make the sphere, since it has no real-world counterpart.
How one represents atoms in a diagram is a matter of taste and of clarity.

Thank you for responding, this actually makes sense to me but my teacher has us calculating the density in unit cells depending on how much space the atom is occupying and how much space is vacant. Wouldn't this imply they are spheres packed together also touching each other? Maybe the atomic radius implys something else I'm not understanding?
 
Atomic radius is calculated by diving the distance between centers of neighboring atoms into two. As Dave wrote atoms don't have a well defined surface, so they don't "touch" each other like balls do. However, atoms do interact - if you squeeze them too closely they will repel each other, if you separate them, they will have tendency to attract each other. These forces keep atoms spaced in the crystal lattice despite the fact they don't "touch".
 
I came.across a headline and read some of the article, so I was curious. Scientists discover that gold is a 'reactive metal' by accidentally creating a new material in the lab https://www.earth.com/news/discovery-that-gold-is-reactive-metal-by-creating-gold-hydride-in-lab-experiment/ From SLAC - A SLAC team unexpectedly formed gold hydride in an experiment that could pave the way for studying materials under extreme conditions like those found inside certain planets and stars undergoing...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
17K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
16K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
8K