1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Water,a manifestation of WHAT?

  1. Jun 28, 2004 #1
    i asked this in chemistry but have been asked to come here so here goes.

    why, when H&O2 come together (apparently there must be 6 molecules before water appears) does this liquid manifest it's self. now i know the mechanics involved but i want to beyond this.if i seperate H from O2 no liquid appears (maybe always there?) so why when H&O2 come together does a liquid appear? what is the liquid a manifestation of? also we know that both H&O will become liquid(that is another query!) on there own at sufficiently low temperatures,now when i bring the two (elements) together it seems that the temperature for liquefaction rises why? and why expand when frozen? does the lower temperature allow a little more fluid in? or is there an energy flow blocked so the the liquid cannot flow back so expands? do H&O work together as some sort of catalyst,in temperature and energy flow? i think that perhaps there is more going on inbetween the nucleous and the electron shell of atoms.

    when you think about it,we know why and how water becomes. but we really don't know WHAT it is!!

    any thoughts?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 28, 2004 #2
    water is hydrogen and oxygen in a particular chemical configuration that exists with the "properties" of "liquid"

    liquid is NOT a specific THING, rather it is a state of a certain body of an elements of complex molecules that behave in a certain matter / fashion. typically, liquids behave in slipping motion when in contact with other liquid molecules

    gases push away from each other

    solids cling to each other

    that's the VERY basics of it.

    so to say water "forms" as a liquid is incorrect. what happens is hydrogen and oxygen combine and form a molecule that exhibits "liquid" properties
     
  4. Jun 28, 2004 #3
    crystalization. it is rigid and creates "pockets"

    think of it like this. take 500 lego blocks and stack them together into a cube. put that cube in a box or bag exactly its size. this is water, basically able to flow and fill every gap it finds. now take all the blocks apart and just throw them into the container you just had/made. you will not be able to get them all in the same container because of that configuration, it makes pockets and generally wastes alot of space.
     
  5. Jun 28, 2004 #4
    okay it is a state. but lets go back to why then that hydrogen and oxygen both go to a liquid state at very low temperatures. there are no bonds,molecules or configurations there. what happens here?
     
  6. Jun 28, 2004 #5

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Chemistry.

    If you haven't had any, it can be a complicated answer...
     
  7. Jun 28, 2004 #6
    if i'm not mistaken ALL elements have "states" they acquire at different "temperatures"

    these are fundamental and i think they are related to energy states of electron orbits.

    electrons "jump" to different orbits depending on their energy level, at lower energy levels (temperature) atoms "jump" to a different "state" that just reacts differently to other atoms.

    i don't know how much of this is theory or reality, this is just information congealed from my physics and chem classes :|
     
  8. Jun 28, 2004 #7

    Alkatran

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Think of it this way: All the molecules have a slight attraction on each other, but at high energies the can escape this attraction.

    Consider a daycare: You can't keep all the children in order while they are full of energy (hot) but once they get sleepy (cold) it's childs play to get them to behave.

    Water is constantly fighting the crystalisation that it tends towards. Get it?
     
  9. Jun 29, 2004 #8
    guys,i appreciate the effort but we are still talking in terms of bonds etc. let me put it this way we need the bonds to produce the reaction needed to get the state of liquidity but the thing is the electrons don't change form and neither does the nucleous and yet the state of liquidity exists. to me it has nothing to do with density and bonds because the atoms themselves don't fundamentaly change in anyway shape or form and neither does it's ability bond again. we have been still talking in terms of chemistry. the only answers i get are based on chemistry which up to this point have not really answered the Ques:WHAT is water the liquid state of? the i think that chemistry is the frame work but not the interior.

    Russ please go ahead i have had a little but i would like to hear what you have to say. i've tried finding more about it myself but none of the chemistry books that i have even mention liquid hydrogen at all.
     
  10. Jun 29, 2004 #9
    Maybe I'm missing something but water is the liquid state of a bunch of H2O molecules.
     
  11. Jun 29, 2004 #10
    as an example of what i mean see if this makes what i'm asking a little clearer. if i have a nail and i punch a hole into a tire air comes out,now for this to happen i need a tire full of air and a nail when i combine the two air comes out but the nail nor the tire tells me what the air IS and yet the air does exist.

    when i bring H&O together in the right amount and mixture, i bring into existence a state of liquid and yet the atoms are NOT in of themselves in a liquid state WHAT IS this liquid state a state of? the H2O molecules are necessary for this state to become(exist) but this not explain the nature of the liquid it's self, just how i can produce it.
     
  12. Jun 29, 2004 #11

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Yeah, they do (or rather, they change state). The "glue" that holds water together and we see as surface tension is called hydrogen bonds. Hydrogen bonds arise due to the asymetry of water molecules. Uneven electron distribution means uneven charge distribution, causing net positive and net negatively charged areas on the molecules. Opposites attract, so the molecules start sticking together.

    When it gets colder, the molecules aren't moving fast enough to avoid lining up and sticking together in a tight chrystal structure: that's ice.
    Not quite. Mixing hydrogen and oxygen (molecules) yeilds a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen molecules. They have to react to form water (burn).
    True. Single atoms aren't bonded to anything and can't be described as "solid" or "liquid."
    The word "liquid" is a word used to describe how water (or any substance) acts under certain conditions.
    Now you're not making sense. There are other liquids besides water, but in this case we're talking about water. "The liquid itself" is a collection of water molecules that act in a way consistent with the definition of a word called "liquid." Its still water, just a specific form (state) of water.

    Maybe you could explain what you mean by "nature of the liquid." It sounds like you think that all liquids are the same and not just states of different types of molecules. You can see this easily enough by comparing mercury with water. Mercury and water clearly are not the same liquid.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2004
  13. Jun 29, 2004 #12
     
  14. Jun 29, 2004 #13
    electrons determine how atoms are going to come together to make elements <mostly>

    the elements themselves make different molecules

    different molecules stuck together make up what you deem to be "texture"

    each step of this can all be traced back to the electrons that determined "how things were going to come together"

    you may think of electrons as being ridiculously small, how can they be significant? understand that the rotations of the electrons in an atom is a vast amount of kinetic energy <comparatively> that and the electron bears the same charge as a proton but opposite despite being orders of magnitude smaller in size.

    they use electromagnets to lift cars in wrecker junkyards. nothing else is causing the force except the motion of electrons through a coil. and this is at a visible level, these forces increase in power exponentially as the distances between them shrinks. on a molecular and atomic level, that's a VERY strong bond.
     
  15. Jun 29, 2004 #14
    different molecules stuck together make up what you deem to be "texture"

    each step of this can all be traced back to the electrons that determined "how things were going to come together"

    you may think of electrons as being ridiculously small, how can they be significant? understand that the rotations of the electrons in an atom is a vast amount of kinetic energy <comparatively> that and the electron bears the same charge as a proton but opposite despite being orders of magnitude smaller in size.

    they use electromagnets to lift cars in wrecker junkyards. nothing else is causing the force except the motion of electrons through a coil. and this is at a visible level, these forces increase in power exponentially as the distances between them shrinks. on a molecular and atomic level, that's a VERY strong bond.[/QUOTE]

    ___________________________________________

    all well and good but lets get back to the steel focus, what is happening here,in that the texture must start to form either with the electrons or has something to do with the interior of the atom(s) otherwise WHERE does the texture come from, since all the electrons are bound forming the lattice?
     
  16. Jun 29, 2004 #15
    the texture is the molecule configuration, which is made BECAUSE of the electron configuration.

    depending on which level you want to analyze, it's ALL making "texture". once a molecule is made it's pretty much "rigid". it's molecular bonds that flex and shift.

    there is no "leather" molecule, you'd make a structure out of carbons hydrogens nitrogens etc etc to create a structure with the "properties" known as leather.

    simply the electrons play a HUGE part in atomic structure, but the bulk of "mass" of a substance will always be neutrons and protons. don't forget them :D
     
  17. Jun 29, 2004 #16
     
  18. Jun 29, 2004 #17
    i'm thinking that's way more complicated than it needs to be :D

    but i'm glad you're pioneering. i will see your name in a sci-journal one of these days and be all like, "yep, that guy wasn't satisfied. he went out and kicked its ass personally"
     
  19. Jun 29, 2004 #18
    more complicated yes but more efficient yes.

    perhaps the drop of water is just the tap barely turned on. or perhaps we could create a hole from the outer shell to the nucleous letting energy out under control or reach in and pull the nucleous through turning the atom or molecule inside out what kind of things while pulling it on the way out would happen.and perhaps then picking off any part of the nucleous that we need, just having fun :biggrin:

    to pioneering, cheers!!
     
  20. Jun 29, 2004 #19

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Well, I see why they sent you to TD. What you are talking about here doesn't have any connection to reality. I'm sorry, but the things you are saying just plain aren't true. You'll need to start off with a basic education in chemistry if you're really interested in how atoms and molecules work.

    One tidbit to get you started: the chemical properties of an atom/molecule are entirely due to the interactions of its electrons.
     
  21. Jun 30, 2004 #20
    i'm not saying that electrons aren't important,they are but all i'm asking,as i have with the steel lattice example is that if i look close then at one atom with all the electrons even from other atoms in it's proximity that i should see a fraction of the metalic form. and that it should lead to see wether the electrons change form, or some other reason why there is a metalic form. the metalic form one would think is evident in each atom that makes up the whole.in other words lets build the lattice one atom at a time,for at some point the metalic properties would begin to show and would lead,i think to better understanding of WHAT is the root of it's metalic properties. and as soon as it does show these properties stop it and slowly back up. is this not a valid inquery?
     
  22. Jun 30, 2004 #21

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    One problem here is you are using extremely poor grammar, which makes it very difficult to understand what you are asking. But from what I can understand of your question, the answer has already been given. I'll say it again - the properties of any material are a result of its chemical structure which is a result of the electron configuration (which is a result of the number of protons). One reason you need multiple atoms to start to see the properties of even a pure element is the properties are related to the chrystal structure and you need a specific number of atoms for a complete chrystal unit.

    It is a valid inquiry, its just that you don't seem all that interested in listening to the answer.
     
  23. Jun 30, 2004 #22
     
  24. Jun 30, 2004 #23
    something itself cannot exert a force unless there is something to exert the force ON.

    in essense, an atom could be a bar magnet in your left hand. there's nothing in your right hand, no matter what you do with your right hand to try and detect the properties of the bar magnet in your left hand you get nothing. now put and atom <magnet> in your right hand. by moving your right hand near your left now you can feel the attractions and repulsions that come from proximity of the two magnets (atoms).

    the properties of liquid, solid, gas don't come from one atom. they come from atom interactions. just as molecular interactions would make texture

    hope this analogy helps some :D
     
  25. Jun 30, 2004 #24

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    A house is made of bricks, yet bricks do not posess rooms or windows. I really don't see why you are having such a hard time with this point.
    Melting point is a property. Since melting point is the energy at which atoms will break their chrystal structure, why would you think that protons and electrons should have such properties? They aren't aoms. Its axiomatic.
    Asked and answered several times already. But another analogy: a brick has certain properties and a wall has certain properties. Some of them are smilar, some aren't. Some of the properties of the wall depend more on the grout (is that the word?) holding the bricks together than on the properties of the brick itself. And when you are building a house, you don't care about the properties of the individual bricks, just the properties of the wall. Same with atoms.
    Yep.
    You tell me: what properties do electrons have that affect how they interact with atoms?
     
  26. Jun 30, 2004 #25
    thats the thing, are the electrons changing or is something else going on. has it got something to do with the perhaps "communication" if you will between the electron and the proton etc.which is obvious that they do. and the "empty space" between the two.which may have energy yet untapped who's to say. i wish i had the facilities to investigate, i'm sure the things to be found would be fascinating.and right now nobody has the "quality" answer. just bricks and mortar answer and that is just not enough.
    its fine for production considerations,you know, i need 100,000lbs of this or that. but not for those that question,want to know and just simply enjoy Discovery.

    one last thing from what i understand as well is that the electron at it's center is hollow and so is the proton,although it is not as large as the electrons hollow center,
    interesting....HMMM!!
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Loading...