Is the shape of an atom really spherical or is there more to it?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bobsmith76
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matter
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the shape of atoms, particularly whether they can be accurately described as spherical or if there is more complexity to their structure. Participants explore theoretical and conceptual aspects of atomic and subatomic shapes, including protons, neutrons, and electrons, as well as the implications of models used to visualize these particles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the meaningfulness of visualizing atomic shapes, suggesting that such representations are merely models with inherent limitations.
  • There is a discussion about the lack of knowledge regarding the actual shape of electrons, with some noting that measurements suggest an electron's electric field may appear spherical, though this does not confirm a definitive shape.
  • Participants mention that protons are composed of quarks, which complicates the discussion of their shape, as quarks are thought to move freely within protons and neutrons.
  • One participant argues that the question of what an atom looks like is poorly posed, emphasizing the difficulty of visualizing such small entities and suggesting that the inquiry might be better framed.
  • Another participant points out a specific representation of an atom, the Atomium, as a misleading depiction of atomic structure.
  • There are contributions that attempt to assert that atoms may have spherical properties due to motion, though the clarity of these statements is questioned by others.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach a consensus on the shape of atoms, with multiple competing views and uncertainties remaining about the nature of atomic and subatomic structures.

Contextual Notes

Some statements reflect confusion or lack of clarity, particularly regarding the coherence of arguments about atomic shapes and properties. The discussion also highlights the challenges of defining shapes at the subatomic level.

bobsmith76
Messages
336
Reaction score
0
There is a big statue of an atom I think in the Hague or maybe Brussels. We all know what it looks like but to me this monument is a catastrophe because that's not what an atom looks like at all. Colors are just living beings ways of converting the information in the wave length of an electromagnetic wave into a new form of information that living beings can innately sense. "Objective matter" that is to say its properties independent of living beings, does not have color. But let's take a look at protons, neutrons and electrons. They're not spherical at all, right? We have no way at the moment of knowing what an electron's shape is or its properties independent of living beings. A proton is made up of three quarks and we do not know what their shape is either, right?

I put this is in atomic physics because it discusses the atom.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure that questions of the type "what does an atom or a quark etc look like?" have any meaningful answers.I don't see anything wrong in forming mental pictures of these microscopic particles provided that one realizes that such pictures are just models only and provided that one gains an awareness of the limitations of the models.As an example when dealing with monoatomic gas molecules colliding at "moderate temperatures" one might find it helpful to imagine the atoms as being like infinitely hard solid spheres.At higher temperatures when some of the collisions become exciting and or ionising it might be more helpful to consider the basic atomic structure model.
 
bobsmith76 said:
I put this is in atomic physics because it discusses the atom.

It has been moved out of that forum and into GP because it doesn't deal with advanced level discussion of atoms.

Zz.
 
bobsmith76 said:
But let's take a look at protons, neutrons and electrons. They're not spherical at all, right? We have no way at the moment of knowing what an electron's shape is or its properties independent of living beings. A proton is made up of three quarks and we do not know what their shape is either, right?

It is difficult to say something has a shape when we get down to the subatomic level. The electrons electric field or magnetic moment or something was measured and was determined to be a perfect sphere to the best our measurements were able to detect. Is this the shape of the electron? Who knows. It may not even have a shape. A proton and neutron, being made of quarks, is even harder to discuss. The quarks are thought to have freedom to move around to the extent that the color force allows, so it would be kind of like saying that marbles shaken around in a jar have a shape.
 
This is not a well-posed question. First, there are two questions, "what does matter really look like?" and "what does an atom really look like?" I am assuming this is about the second.

What does an atom really look like? It's really too small to see. Really. That's your answer.

Now, I suspect that this isn't really your question. Your real question is probably "what would an atom look like if..." But a) that isn't what it really looks like, and b) we could guess at what you mean, but it would be better for you to think about it and pose the question you have rather than to let us guess.
 
bobsmith76 said:
There is a big statue of an atom I think in the Hague or maybe Brussels. We all know what it looks like but to me this monument is a catastrophe because that's not what an atom looks like at all.
If you mean the Atomium that is a ball-and-stick representation of an iron crystal unit cell.
 
This is not surly we told about the shape of these atom. Basically this property show this is spherical or may be that are some other shape and fast motion may be build that shape spherical.
 
tanyatarots said:
This is not surly we told about the shape of these atom. Basically this property show this is spherical or may be that are some other shape and fast motion may be build that shape spherical.

I find this sentence to be incoherent. Could you break your thoughts down to be more understandable?
 

Similar threads

High School Are Subatomic particles a form of matter?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Are Di-Atomic Molecules spherical?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad What causes magnetism at the atomic level?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Undergrad Time rondeau crystals, experimental observations
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Undergrad Shape of wave function (probability distribution) of a single photon
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
High School Assistance finding the nuclear energy difference during nuclear fusion
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School Can a hypothetical atom be made out of positrons and electrons ?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Undergrad Are subatomic particles spherical?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
Undergrad Why are there not more ferromagnetic Materials?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Undergrad Electron angular momentum in diatomic molecules
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K