Photon-proton/ proton-electron interactions

[Drakkith]

I really don't know anything of Quantum Mechanics. I could not understand why the electron only be found in the volume that form by a standing wave form. The standing wave is the result that the electron behave in atom not the causes! Could you suggest an easy (to understand) book or URL ? Thanks a lot

My favorite book on QM is: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1840468505/?tag=pfamazon01-20

It gives the history of the development of QM and the basics of the underlying principles in a very very easy to read and understand form.

I imagine that if there only one electron and one proton in space. They will run to hit the other. If their structure is not changed by the hit and there is no energy loss then the momentum will make them bouncing forever. But I don't know why there is no loss and damages occured. What is the structure of it or may it need a lot of energy to change their structure.

Put simply, the electron and proton will never travel fast enough just from their mutual attraction to do anything to each other. An electron is considered to be an elementary particle, and not made up of anything smaller, so it is not possible to "damage" it. A proton is made up of quarks, but to do anything to these quarks would take a LOT of energy that only extremely high speeds can deliver. Much higher than simple attract can cause. We use particle colliders to accelerate particles to huge speeds near the speed of light to get them to a high enough energy to actually change/destroy them.

Furthermore when electron and proton move there are magnetic field occured. Then the electron and proton start to spin because of the magnetic field. So when the electron hit proton it will bouncing to the orbit that it could be stable there. But sometime it will be force to attack proton and bouncing again. Because of spinning made it not symetrical, so it will not move in straight line but orbit around the proton like the cloud. ^^

Sorry, this isn't true at all. One of the big things that stumped physicists in the early 1900's was that if classical physics was correct, the electron should emit radiation and fall into the nucleus within a billionth of a second. This does not happen. This issue was resolved with the development of QM.

Since atom always emit EM-radiation, So the electron must lose the energy when collision occurred with enough energy. Thinking about this I come to the conclusion that the atom also need right energy to repair itself. It could only repair itself with correct amount of energy.

Nope, an atom is not damaged in any way whatsoever by it's electrons. Nor does it always emit radiation. Radiation is only emitted from a lone atom when electrons change orbits or something happens in the nucleus, like particle decay.

 

[Twich]

Put simply, the electron and proton will never travel fast enough just from their mutual attraction to do anything to each other. An electron is considered to be an elementary particle, and not made up of anything smaller, so it is not possible to "damage" it. A proton is made up of quarks, but to do anything to these quarks would take a LOT of energy that only extremely high speeds can deliver. Much higher than simple attract can cause. We use particle colliders to accelerate particles to huge speeds near the speed of light to get them to a high enough energy to actually change/destroy them.



Sorry, this isn't true at all. One of the big things that stumped physicists in the early 1900's was that if classical physics was correct, the electron should emit radiation and fall into the nucleus within a billionth of a second. This does not happen. This issue was resolved with the development of QM.



Nope, an atom is not damaged in any way whatsoever by it's electrons. Nor does it always emit radiation. Radiation is only emitted from a lone atom when electrons change orbits or something happens in the nucleus, like particle decay.

It seem not resonable to me that the electron felt lazy and drop down emit EM radiation. It sound reasonably to me if it hit something and emit EM radiation. Where could I find any mathematical prove that the classical physics was not correct? Thanks.

 

[Drakkith]

It seem not resonable to me that the electron felt lazy and drop down emit EM radiation. It sound reasonably to me if it hit something and emit EM radiation. Where could I find any mathematical prove that the classical physics was not correct? Thanks.

The book I linked will explain exactly what you are asking.

But here's a few things:

1. Protons and electrons are charged. This means they respond to the Electromagnetic force. This force acts at a distance and doesn't require that the particle "hit" each other. (Which doesn't even make sense really, as at the quantum level objects are no longer thought of as little balls that bounce around.

2. Any acceleration of an electric charge will emit EM radiation. This is a proven fact. Since protons and electrons are charged they emit radiation when they accelerate.

3. An electron in an orbital around a nucleus can only exist in certain states that have very specific energy levels. This is referred to as being "quantized", hence were the term Quantum comes from. When an electron drops from a higher energy orbital into a lower energy orbital it emits a very specific amount of energy in the form of EM radiation.

You can find out more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics

 

[Otakublade]

I am a lamen and as such I am sure any theory I have will be horrificly wrong but I do have a thought on how to explain the orbit and sutainability of atoms with protons and electrons. in our level of the universe a shuttle can orbit the Earth due to the right velocity at the right distance from the planet and its gravitational pull between the two objects so that the pull down is countered by the velocity forward by the shuttle. in the case of electrons and protons the force is not gravity but electromagnetism and an electron is basicly pure negative energy and so my lamen theory is that the more energy the electron has the faster it goes and subsequently the stronger the attraction to the proton so no matter how strong the force to come down is the velocity matches to sustain an orbit. does that make any sense? and it also might translate into the effect of photons exciting an atom as well as it excites all of an atom and the electrons staying in their orbit even after the disruption from the photon yet pushing one electron out. the exciting of electron and proton increases the magnetic force between the two and accelerates the electrons and the electrons closest to the nucleus are the strongest and fastest causign more repulsion toward the other electrons above it and boom the outer most and weakest electron is both accelerated and repulsed more causing it to fly off. does that make any sense at all? I warned you I was a total lamen in the beginning so I expect a you idiot type of response but hoping that this lamen explanation makes some kind of sense on some level. oh and as for the super hero story chat perhaps you can repel objects by simultaniously creating negative charge to both the object and yourself to repel them without destroying the objects or like was said earlier to create a gravity field behind the object or to attract more mass behind an object to attract a gravity weapon by creating something of a "lightning" rod or rather gravity rod by having more mass behind the ball to attract it than in front of it. kind of like how magneto used his power in the x-men how he could move objects by manipulating magnetic fields both around himself but anywhere within his range to move objects almost as well as telekenisis.

 

[Drakkith]

in our level of the universe a shuttle can orbit the Earth due to the right velocity at the right distance from the planet and its gravitational pull between the two objects so that the pull down is countered by the velocity forward by the shuttle.

Kind of. The pull isn't countered in any way, it's simply that the shuttle is going so fast that as it falls towards the Earth, the Earth moves away under it at an equal rate.

in the case of electrons and protons the force is not gravity but electromagnetism and an electron is basicly pure negative energy

Not true. An electron is not "pure negative energy". Negative energy doesn't exist except in a mathematical way. And "pure energy" doesn't exist at all. Energy is a term used to describe how much work something is capable of performing. It manifests in reality in different ways depending on what you're talking about and in the context of what theory. For example General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics do not describe energy the same way.

and so my lamen theory is that the more energy the electron has the faster it goes and subsequently the stronger the attraction to the proton so no matter how strong the force to come down is the velocity matches to sustain an orbit. does that make any sense?

Not really. The attraction that the two particles feel on each other is based mostly on the distance between them. Any magnetic force felt by the particles would manifest differently I believe. Furthermore, as the electron "orbits" the nucleus, under classical mechanics it should radiate its energy away as EM radiation and fall into the nucleus. This does not happen and was initially explained about 90 years ago by Niels Bohr at the beginnings of Quantum Mechanics.

the exciting of electron and proton increases the magnetic force between the two and accelerates the electrons and the electrons closest to the nucleus are the strongest and fastest causign more repulsion toward the other electrons above it and boom the outer most and weakest electron is both accelerated and repulsed more causing it to fly off. does that make any sense at all?

Again, no. Keep in mind that charged particles are screaming past each other at near light speed all over the place in space. If your idea was correct one could expect to see those particles being captured by oppositely charged particles since the force between them would be incredibly high. But this does not happen.

I warned you I was a total lamen in the beginning so I expect a you idiot type of response but hoping that this lamen explanation makes some kind of sense on some level. oh and as for the super hero story chat perhaps you can repel objects by simultaniously creating negative charge to both the object and yourself to repel them without destroying the objects or like was said earlier to create a gravity field behind the object or to attract more mass behind an object to attract a gravity weapon by creating something of a "lightning" rod or rather gravity rod by having more mass behind the ball to attract it than in front of it. kind of like how magneto used his power in the x-men how he could move objects by manipulating magnetic fields both around himself but anywhere within his range to move objects almost as well as telekenisis.

The key is HOW could one do this. How do we alter an electromagnetic field? We move charges or magnets around or work with EM radiation. That's it. Each one of those concepts has very very specific rules and consequences and cannot be altered at a whim. We cannot "create" charges either. Nor can we alter gravity unless we move around LOTS of mass or energy. (Which itself requires energy in the first place) The field itself cannot be manipulated in any other way.

 

[Imabuleva]

i still don't understand how the whole atom is excited when its just one electron rising a shell then dropping a shell once it releases the photon. the atom doesn't change just the electron.
thanks :D

I just wanted to add my two cents. Think about this classically as if you were to jump in the air. Is it the earth-you system that is in an excited, unstable state while you are in the air? Or is it just you that is in an excited state?

Remember that due to Newton's third law when you fall to the earth, the Earth also falls to you; that is, the earth-you system collapses back into the unexcited state it was in before you jumped.

 

[jtbell]

Welcome to Physics Forums, Imabuleva!

I suggest that before you respond to a post, that you look at the date on it, especially if you found it via a Google search or forum search. The post that you responded to is more than nine years old.

 

[Imabuleva]

Hi, jitbell.

I replied because the topic is extremely interesting. I apologize that it's old.