Why Do Electrons Closer to Nucleus Have Less Energy?

AI Thread Summary
Electrons closer to the nucleus have less energy due to their lower potential energy, as described by the equation E = -b/n^2, where higher principal quantum numbers (n) correspond to higher energy levels. As electrons move further from the nucleus, their potential energy increases until they are completely removed from the atom, at which point their potential energy is zero. The nucleus is positively charged and consists of protons, which exist as discrete particles rather than a continuous positive charge. The existence of neutrons is inferred from the discrepancy between the expected and actual atomic weights, indicating that additional mass is present in the nucleus without contributing to its charge. This understanding supports the particle nature of protons and the structure of atomic nuclei.
DeathKnight
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
Some one please make me understand why electrons closer to the nucleus have less energy than the ones which are farther from it. Is it because they have more potential energy?
Secondly, How do we know that protons exist as particles but not as a ball of positive charge.
Thanks in advance for any help... :smile:
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
The energy if an electron can be described by the following equation,
E = -b / n^2
Where E is energy,
b is a constant equal to (2*pi^2 * m_e^4)/h^2, where m is the mass of the electron, and h is Plank's Constant, so evaluated, b = 2.18E-18 J,
and n is the principle quantum number describig which electron shell the electron resides in.
So as you can see, as the electron goes into higher and higher shells (higher n values), the energy goes to smaller and smaller negative values for energy.

The energy an electron has around an atoms is it potential energy from the nucleus. The farther away from the nucleus, the more potential energy it has, up until it is completely removed from the atom, at which case it has zero potential energy.


We know the nucleus has a positive charge, which is the heaviest, most dense part of an atom. We also know that that amount that it is positive only comes in "packets" of a certain charge to cancel out the charge on an electron, so you can't have 3.4 + charges since they come in whole numbers in the form of a proton, just like you can't have 3.4 negative charges since you can only have whole numbers of electrons.
Then we can also predict how many protons a certain element should have (Hrogen 1, Sodium 11, ...), but if you "weight" the atom, the weight usually comes out to be more than the predicted weight, sometimes double or more. So we know that there must be something else in the nucleus that is contributing to the overall weight, but no the charge, thus neutrons and not just one blob of positive charge.
 
It seems like a simple enough question: what is the solubility of epsom salt in water at 20°C? A graph or table showing how it varies with temperature would be a bonus. But upon searching the internet I have been unable to determine this with confidence. Wikipedia gives the value of 113g/100ml. But other sources disagree and I can't find a definitive source for the information. I even asked chatgpt but it couldn't be sure either. I thought, naively, that this would be easy to look up without...
I was introduced to the Octet Rule recently and make me wonder, why does 8 valence electrons or a full p orbital always make an element inert? What is so special with a full p orbital? Like take Calcium for an example, its outer orbital is filled but its only the s orbital thats filled so its still reactive not so much as the Alkaline metals but still pretty reactive. Can someone explain it to me? Thanks!!
Back
Top