Is it possible to squash an atom?

[NewToThis]

What would happen to an atom or molecule if you put it in a vice and tightened the vice as tight as possible?

 

[ZapperZ]

What would happen to an atom or molecule if you put it in a vice and tightened the vice as tight as possible?

Now, you ARE aware, aren't you, that the "vice" itself consists of "atoms and molecules"? Think about this a bit more and see if you still want to ask this question.

Zz.

 

[bhobba]

See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_degeneracy_pressure:

Thanks
Bill

 

[CWatters]

Depending on how and how much you compress atoms you end up with a plasma of particles or even a black hole.

 

[Isaac0427]

Now, you ARE aware, aren't you, that the "vice" itself consists of "atoms and molecules"? Think about this a bit more and see if you still want to ask this question.

Zz.

I think the question was more about the title of the thread and not the specifics in the question. I'm pretty sure the OP wants to know if it is possible to squash an atom.

 

[ZapperZ]

I think the question was more about the title of the thread and not the specifics in the question. I'm pretty sure the OP wants to know if it is possible to squash an atom.

I disagree, because the nature of the question CAN play a significant role in the answer.

For example, let's say by "squashing", I mean to confine something to smaller and smaller spatial dimension. Now THAT is now a well-defined concept. I can easily look at what happens in the simplest case of a 1D potential well. What happen if I make the width of the potential well smaller and smaller? This matches my meaning of "squashing".

But this is not that simple with an "anvil", or any kind of a vice. Can you make any sense out of something like that? I can't.

Zz.

 

[houlahound]

Aren't experiments at CERN squashing atoms until they break?

 

[Isaac0427]

Again, I'm pretty sure the OP is asking "if you take an atom and exert an extremely large force compressing it, what will happen as the magnitude of the force increases?" Whether you agree with this interpretation of the question or not, you should answer it. The OP definitely wants an answer, not an argument about what he/she means. I'd answer that question myself but I do not know the answer.

 

[ZapperZ]

Again, I'm pretty sure the OP is asking "if you take an atom and exert an extremely large force compressing it, what will happen as the magnitude of the force increases?" Whether you agree with this interpretation of the question or not, you should answer it. The OP definitely wants an answer, not an argument about what he/she means. I'd answer that question myself but I do not know the answer.

But you are not aware that even using your interpretation of that, it makes it also equally vague and ambiguous. What exactly is this "large force"? I can put an atom in a very large electric field, and thus, exert a large force on it. How does that "squash" the atom? All it has done is possibly create a polarization on the charge distribution around the atom. Is this squashing?

Before a question can be answered, you have to fully understand what is being asked. If you think you can get away with a vague understanding of a question and simply dive head first into answering it, try it sometime when you take an exam.

Zz.

 

[Nugatory]

Again, I'm pretty sure the OP is asking "if you take an atom and exert an extremely large force compressing it, what will happen as the magnitude of the force increases?" Whether you agree with this interpretation of the question or not, you should answer it.

If that's the question, Bhobba and cwatters answered it in #3 and #4 of this thread.

 

[Nugatory]

Aren't experiments at CERN squashing atoms until they break?

No.

It's clear that OP is asking about somehow compressing atoms into a smaller spatial volume, and the interactions that take place in a collider are quite different from that.

If you want to understand more about the interactions that happen in a collider and why "squashing" is a poor and misleading description, you may want to start your own thread on that topic.

 

[Nugatory]

Mentor's note: a number of offtopic posts have been removed from this thread.

 

[Khashishi]

Well, it depends on what you mean by squashing. As you increase the pressure and density of atoms, eventually you form bonds and antibonds between atoms. The shape of the electron cloud changes due to the bonds and antibonds, and maybe you could interpret that as being "squashed". Antibonds have higher energy than bonds but they form because electrons have nowhere else to go due to Pauli exclusion principle. In an antibond, the electron clouds don't overlap (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antib...media/File:Dihydrogen-LUMO-phase-3D-balls.png), but they sort of push each other apart. Now, if you have atoms on all sides, then the antibonds will be more complex, but generally, the electron clouds will form patterns that refuse to overlap.

There's a limit to how much you can squash atoms. Under extreme pressures, like in white dwarf stars, we don't really have atoms but a plasma of nuclei and electrons. Just for fun, let's pretend it was made up of atoms of hydrogen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf gives a white dwarf density of 1*10^9 kg/m^3. The Bohr radius is about 5.29*10^-11 meter. If we take this as the "radius" of a spherical hydrogen atom, then we get a volume of 6.21*10^-31 m^3. If we assume the hydrogen atoms are closely-packed spheres (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-packing_of_equal_spheres), then my calculation gives a density of 3640 kg/m^3. Clearly much less than white dwarf densities. There isn't nearly enough space for non-overlapping electron clouds-- so electrons are pushed into higher momenta. (Going to higher momenta opens up more phase space for electron clouds.) But high momenta electrons can't be treated as "bound" to any nuclei, so it's a plasma and not really a molecule.

 

[shoaibiryk]

Depending on how and how much you compress atoms you end up with a plasma of particles or even a black hole.

mentor note: ...removed unrelated link...

 

[NewToThis]

Thanks for the responses. Perhaps it was a bit of a silly and obvious question.

 

[Khashishi]

Not obvious at all.

 

[NewToThis]

Again, I'm pretty sure the OP is asking "if you take an atom and exert an extremely large force compressing it, what will happen as the magnitude of the force increases?" Whether you agree with this interpretation of the question or not, you should answer it. The OP definitely wants an answer, not an argument about what he/she means. I'd answer that question myself but I do not know the answer.

Yes, I was really asking if it is possible to squash an atom, to break it up using pressure.

 

[houlahound]

You missed a whole deleted debate on what your question meant.

 

[NewToThis]

You missed a whole deleted debate on what your question meant.

damn.

 

[houlahound]

I will create a new thread on it.

 

[ZapperZ]

Yes, I was really asking if it is possible to squash an atom, to break it up using pressure.

Pressure using WHAT?

It seems that you may not have had the message that has been floating around this thread. Let me try this one more time before I give up on this thread.

When I apply pressure on, say, your hand, I'm pushing onto it using something, maybe my own hand. This is fine because we are all macroscopic, and everything can be easily described by our usual, classical world.

But you wanted something else, which is "squashing an atom". When you go into this territory, the RULES OF THE GAME become very different. You don't simply use your hand to squash or apply pressure on an atom! It is why I asked you in my very first post of this thread on whether you forget that the "vise" that is doing the squashing is ALSO composed of atoms, etc., a question which you never bothered to respond to.

As Khashishi has stated, your question is not obvious at all, because it is full of ambiguous situations. And the fact that you still haven't realized this means that you are missing one of the most important things that you can learn from this forum. The nature of the question that we asked is often as important as the answer that we seek. This forum often forces you to sit back and asks yourself "What exactly am I asking here?" "What do I mean EXACTLY when I use this word"?

You are not the first to encounter this. If you stay here long enough, you'll see a question that gets asked here periodically, which is "What is "touching"?" At the atomic/quantum mechanical level, to be able to answer if anything is touching anything else, one has to FIRST define what one means by "touch". If not, then you may have something mind, while *I* have another definition in mind. It leads to an ambiguous question and answer. This is why I asked you way in the beginning on what you mean by "squashing" and what exactly are you using to do this squashing. Without a clear explanation, you will not get a clear answer.

Zz.

 

[NewToThis]

I will create a new thread on it.

Thanks. As long as it's worth discussing.

 

[davenn]

Thanks. As long as it's worth discussing.

So do you understand the answers you have been given ?

 

[NewToThis]

Pressure using WHAT?

It seems that you may not have had the message that has been floating around this thread. Let me try this one more time before I give up on this thread.

When I apply pressure on, say, your hand, I'm pushing onto it using something, maybe my own hand. This is fine because we are all macroscopic, and everything can be easily described by our usual, classical world.

But you wanted something else, which is "squashing an atom". When you go into this territory, the RULES OF THE GAME become very different. You don't simply use your hand to squash or apply pressure on an atom! It is why I asked you in my very first post of this thread on whether you forget that the "vise" that is doing the squashing is ALSO composed of atoms, etc., a question which you never bothered to respond to.

As Khashishi has stated, your question is not obvious at all, because it is full of ambiguous situations. And the fact that you still haven't realized this means that you are missing one of the most important things that you can learn from this forum. The nature of the question that we asked is often as important as the answer that we seek. This forum often forces you to sit back and asks yourself "What exactly am I asking here?" "What do I mean EXACTLY when I use this word"?

You are not the first to encounter this. If you stay here long enough, you'll see a question that gets asked here periodically, which is "What is "touching"?" At the atomic/quantum mechanical level, to be able to answer if anything is touching anything else, one has to FIRST define what one means by "touch". If not, then you may have something mind, while *I* have another definition in mind. It leads to an ambiguous question and answer. This is why I asked you way in the beginning on what you mean by "squashing" and what exactly are you using to do this squashing. Without a clear explanation, you will not get a clear answer.

Zz.

Sorry, I did see your response but didn't get round to responding, but it did make me realize why it was a bit of a silly question.

I thought atoms were different sizes. I thought perhaps using something like graphene you could create something like a vice to squash smaller atoms, but if all atoms are the same size then what you are trying to squash will just tunnel through the vice. But what if it was a molecule of several atoms? could the pressure force it to break up?

And by "obvious", I meant the answer was obvious rather than my question.

 

[NewToThis]

So do you understand the answers you have been given ?

I do, unless anyone has anything else to add.

 

[houlahound]

How do you plan on decreasing the distance between the graphene and the target?

 

[davenn]

Sorry, I did see your response but didn't get round to responding, but it did make me realize why it was a bit of a silly question.

no such thing as a silly question ... it's always good to ask

I thought atoms were different sizes.

yes, they are different sizes and masses ... an atom of say lead is much bigger and heavier than an atom of say hydrogen
but as far as I'm aware you cannot use some heavy atoms to squash (compress) a smaller atom. there are atomic forces
that stop that from happening.
But you can fire other particles at an atoms and split the nucleus up. ... remember that the core of an atom is not just a solid ball
rather it is composed of smaller particles ... protons and neutrons, that can be, with enough force, split apart
pretty sure @ZapperZ is involved in that sort of work with particle accelerators

But what if it was a molecule of several atoms? could the pressure force it to break up?

you can break down a molecule to its individual atoms, but again, not by squashing the moleculeDave