B Why is it possible to push your finger through butter?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter arupel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Solid
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on why a finger cannot pass through solid objects like a table, despite the atomic structure being mostly empty space. The primary explanation involves electrical repulsion between the electron orbits of atoms in the finger and the table, which prevents penetration. Additionally, the Pauli exclusion principle is mentioned as a factor, emphasizing the stability of atomic configurations. The conversation also touches on the nature of intermolecular bonds in different materials, noting that while some substances, like butter, can be easily displaced, solid objects maintain their structure due to these forces. Ultimately, the thread concludes that the question of pushing through solids is more about displacement than actual penetration.
arupel
Messages
45
Reaction score
2
Basically the vast amount of space at the atomic level is empty so on that basis of this it should not be that difficult to push your finger through a table.

Primary explanation is that it is electrical repulsion between the electrons orbits of the atoms of my finger to that of the table? How does this work?

Second possible explanation is that it is the Pauli exclusion principle. How does this work?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
arupel said:
Primary explanation is that it is electrical repulsion between the electrons orbits of the atoms of my finger to that of the table? How does this work?

What do you mean when you ask how it works? Go to YouTube and do a search for Feynman magnets. The video clip is about seven and a half minutes long.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
arupel said:
Second possible explanation is that it is the Pauli exclusion principle. How does this work?
and since you are aware of the Pauli exclusion principle, have you checked out to what it actually says ?

Go and do what @Mister T and I have suggested and come back with any specific question on bits you don't understand :smile:Dave
 
You can also search for PF threads on the subject, where you will see that you basic premise
arupel said:
Basically the vast amount of space at the atomic level is empty
is false.
 
The simple answer is that the arrangement of electrons in your finger cannot easily electro-statically overcome the arrangement of electrons in the table because they are both already in too stable of an atomic configuration. The outer electron shells very much repel one another in a springy fashion and floor atoms hold us up by our foot atoms in this way. I say springy because there is a slight give, which is why a ball bearing bounces on a marble floor.

OTOH, atoms squeezed together with enough force and loosened with heat can interconnect. Coal squeezed into diamonds is an example. Since our fingers are partly carbon, that portion might become diamond under extreme conditions, I suppose. Ouch.

Even if you dip your fingers in water, the partly free atoms of the liquid are too stable for these electron shells to give and totally mix with the electron shells of your finger. The intact atoms of liquids or gases like air, both fluids and loosely coherent under normal temperature and pressure, merely part enough to allow the stable solid atomic configuration of your finger to pass by the liquid atoms.

Wes
 
DrClaude said:
You can also search for PF threads on the subject, where you will see that you basic premise

is false.
I have a feeling that your reply could over - simplified. The Rutherford alphascattering results suggest that it is not "false' - if you interpret the results as they were originally interpreted - that there is a lot of 'empty' space, or at least very low density stuff in the gaps between the nuclei of atoms of a solid. But I agree that simplified, mechanical models of the atomic level can be misleading.
 
  • Like
Likes DrClaude
It has to do of how strong intermolecular bonds of a material are.For example NaCl intermolecular bonds are very strong(they are ionic) and that's why NaCl has a high melting point.H20 bonds are covalent but polar so they are quite strong to be broken.O2 bonds are covalent and non-polar so they are easily broken.
 
CaptainMarvel1899 said:
It has to do of how strong intermolecular bonds of a material are.For example NaCl intermolecular bonds are very strong(they are ionic) and that's why NaCl has a high melting point.H20 bonds are covalent but polar so they are quite strong to be broken.O2 bonds are covalent and non-polar so they are easily broken.
This has nothing to do with the question asked.
 
It has . Thats why some materials are solids in room temperature , some are liquids and some are gases.
 
  • #10
CaptainMarvel1899 said:
It has . Thats why some materials are solids in room temperature , some are liquids and some are gases.
No. The question is about why you can't push your finger through a solid.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
  • #11
Is butter a solid?
I can push my finger through butter.
 
  • #12
256bits said:
Is butter a solid?
Classification alert! :eek:
 
  • Like
Likes CaptainMarvel1899
  • #13
Nice one.
 
  • #14
256bits said:
Is butter a solid?
I can push my finger through butter.
From the point of view of the original question, you're not pushing your finger through butter. You are moving the butter aside to make room for your finger.

This thread is getting silly. Thanks to @Wes Tausend for the best answer.

Thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
Back
Top