Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is our Solar System a large Atom?

  1. Dec 24, 2004 #1
    What do we know about the atom? All we know is that it has mass and that mass is energy. We know that when you smash an atom you get smaller parts.

    Ok let's forget the silly names we give everything and lets call mass well lets call mass mass.

    We know that our solar system is made up of mass and if you smash it you will get smaller parts. We also know that our Solar System is part of a system lets call it a Galaxy or a Molecule what ever you like.

    Lets say that an atom is part of a galaxy well it is isn't it. Has anyone calculated how many atoms are in a grain of sand vs. how many stars are in a Galaxy.

    Now with all these similarities aside let us remember that Nature tends to repeat it's self.

    Now if you were nature and you wanted to evolve different dimensions then would it not be the easiest to make one fit into the other and so on.

    First it is Big Bang then it is String Theory then Membrane Theory.

    It sounds like cell division to me.

    But then again what do I know.
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2004
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 24, 2004 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The macroscopic realm operates according to a decidedly different set of rules than the quantum realm. The short answer is 'no' for more reasons than I care to count.
  4. Dec 24, 2004 #3


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    It is true that much of what we see in nature is self-similar on multiple scales (like fractals), but the solar system is not like an atom in any meaningful way. For instance, electrons aren't little balls uniformly circling the nucleus of an atom. They are bundles of energy that have the potential to exist in a range of locations about the nucleus, and by absorbing or emitting photons they can exist at higher or lower potentials (highly over-simplified explanation!). The laws of nature at the quantum level are a bit disconcerting - with existance expressed as functions of potentials and probability instead of certainty.
  5. Dec 24, 2004 #4
    If the strong force was in a system the size of the Solar System would it be similar to gravity?

    What I am getting at is things seem to get stronger when condensed.

    All Gods and Creation Theories are Man Made.
    John Quest 2004
  6. Dec 24, 2004 #5
    This paper
    seems quite suspicious to me, but advocates for the idea that we live in a Cantorian spacetime, self-similar; in the paper they give a law that is appliable to all scales, from atomic to astrophysical scales
  7. Oct 1, 2007 #6
    just a mechanic

    im just a golf course mechanic but for years I have thought back to the days of physics class in high school and remembering the picture of an atom with its satellites circling around it. It struck me how similar our solar system and a atom look alike. Ive read in string theory
    that dimensions could be up to 10 to the power of 10 or something like that. Inside those dimensions could be more vast universes like ours its just a "verse" like songs or a bible which a has verses and all in conjunction complete itself. so we could be a spec in a molecule in a brick of gods house. And he wouldn't even know it. Theoretically speaking.
    just a mechanic no degrees
  8. Oct 1, 2007 #7

    D H

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    The picture of the atom with electrons orbiting around the nucleus is essentially the Bohr model of the atom. The modern view is a lot fuzzier, so to speak. The electrons are not whizzing points. They are instead clouds of probability. The shapes of these clouds varies with the different orbitals.
  9. Oct 2, 2007 #8
    with our 3 dimensional eyes this is what we see. "clouds of probability" what if we could see beyond the 3rd di, would we see more?
  10. Oct 2, 2007 #9


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That's not a coincidence.

    It is often the case that new science is phrased in terms of old science that bears a superficial resemblance, but the similarities usually fade with time. The original models of the atom resembled the solar system because the solar system was something we understood and had already described. The pictures diverged the more we learned about its actual structure and the behavior of the particles within it.
  11. Sep 29, 2009 #10
    The electron orbits about the nucleus of the atom in an manner that allows us to make, at best, an educated guess as to it's location at any given moment. Think of a ninja with nun-chucks. Now let's substitute the nun-chucks with a swinging tether ball, a ball attached to a string, in the zero gravity environment of space so they won't have the ground or anything else to interfere with the ball. (The ninja being the nucleus and the ball being the electron.) They could swing the ball around them in any direction they wanted. Now as an observer with no way of communicating with them, you could only take a guess as to the exact placement of the ball at any given moment.

    Now the planets orbit the sun in our solar system right, does that make them similar? Well, the planets orbit the sun at a determinable rate, in a set direction and in line with the sun's equator. The Mayan's were able to calculate almost the exact location of all the planets over 2000 years ago for any given time, were they lucky? No, with so many determinable factors, it's pretty much a concrete system though the math is a bit more than basic.
  12. Sep 29, 2009 #11


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Very old thread, locked.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook