Why most particles are spherical?

In summary: But yes it would be the classical -and apparently obsolute - radius I was thinkin about - Crud, so much for having a Human Resource department doing physics :grumpy:.
  • #1
rick112
7
0
why most particles are spherical??

Hi

I was just wondering why most of the objects (such as planets, drop of water, atomic and subatomic particles) are spherical in shape..is there a primary shape that particles tend to take up??

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Who said subatomic particles are spheres?
 
  • #3
Pictures in high school textbooks :D
 
  • #4
For water drop, it's because of the surface tension. At the spherical shape, the drop has smallest surface area so its tension energy is at the lowest of all.
For atronomical objects, the cause is nearly the same: At spherical shapes, they all have smallest gravitational potential. But for those too small (severall hundred km in diameter), the gravitational force is not strong enough to win the hardness of the material. So they often appear in irregular shapes.
 
  • #5
hi

i knew i was going to be in trouble over that statement(sub atomic and atomic particles are spherical)..i am sorry for that...
well still my question remains is there a basic shape that most particle or object tends to achieve...?
 
  • #6
Well, liquid drops, when gravitational effects are not important, will tend to form spheres due to surface tension- least surface area. Larger planetary and stellar bodies form spheres due to gravitation.
 
  • #7
A sphere would equalize energy/stress in a substance. In a liquid the intermolecular forces produce tension, and this is minimized in a circular (2D) or spherical (3D) form.

Large masses under gravity tend to form spherical shape, but rotation will cause the mass to assume a shape known as an oblate spheroid.
 
  • #8
I think it has mostly to do with minimization of potential energy in an isotropic universe.

The potential energy can be due to force fields like gravitational or electromagnetic or surface forces like surface tension etc.
 
  • #9
hi

well thank you all for ur response...
well i have one more question...
i would really like to know what is the shape of subatomic/atomic particles? and what is the reason for "that" particular shape??
 
  • #10
rick112 said:
hi

well thank you all for ur response...
well i have one more question...
i would really like to know what is the shape of subatomic/atomic particles? and what is the reason for "that" particular shape??

elementary particles have no shape, they are point-like as we know today.

atoms and atomic nuclei have spatial probability distrubution functions (called wavefunctions), they don't have a definite shape by themselves, but their spatial distribution functions may have certain symmetries.
 
  • #11
malawi_glenn said:
elementary particles have no shape, they are point-like as we know today.

That is not entirelly true. I know, that at least the electron has been "assigned" a radius (somehing about [tex]10^{-15}[/tex] m) How this is messured/calculated/whatever or if it even make sense I don't know.
 
  • #12
Troels said:
That is not entirelly true. I know, that at least the electron has been "assigned" a radius (somehing about [tex]10^{-15}[/tex] m) How this is messured/calculated/whatever or if it even make sense I don't know.


Source please, you are talking to a guy who are majoring in subatomic physics ;-)

This is the only radius I am aware of, and it is not a measure of an electrons 'real' radius:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_electron_radius

Here are some lecture notes on scattering, see slide #3
http://www4.tsl.uu.se/~tord/KP/Material/KP08_material/K2.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
A large amount of progress was made in the early days of nuclear physics using a liquid drop model of the nucleus, albeit for heavy (many nucleon) nuclei.

I believe John Wheeler who died this week, along with Bohr were those who first proposed the model.
 
  • #15
Subatomic particles (like electrons and photons) don't have any shape analogs in 3D world.

Lied to have you been.
 
  • #16
malawi_glenn said:
Source please, you are talking to a guy who are majoring in subatomic physics ;-)

As a major in nanophysics, Elementary particles have never been my strong subject. Just stumbled upon it some time ago and though it made no sense at all in a QM perspective I had not the leisure to pursue the matter furhter

But yes it would be the classical -and apparently obsolute - radius I was thinkin about - Crud, so much for having a Human Resource department doing physics :grumpy:. (Ask if you would like the story)
 

1. Why do most particles in nature have a spherical shape?

Most particles in nature have a spherical shape because it is the most energetically favorable arrangement. The forces acting on the particles, such as gravity and electromagnetic forces, cause the particles to minimize their surface energy by forming a compact spherical shape.

2. Are all particles in nature perfectly spherical?

No, not all particles in nature are perfectly spherical. Some particles may have slight deviations from a perfect sphere due to factors such as their composition or external forces acting on them. However, these deviations are usually small and do not significantly affect the spherical shape of the particle.

3. Can particles have different shapes besides spherical?

Yes, particles can have different shapes besides spherical. Some particles may have elongated or irregular shapes, depending on their composition and the forces acting on them. However, spherical particles are the most common shape in nature due to the reasons mentioned in the first question.

4. How does the shape of a particle affect its properties?

The shape of a particle can greatly affect its properties. For example, spherical particles have a larger surface area-to-volume ratio, allowing for more efficient interactions with their surroundings. This can impact properties such as reactivity, solubility, and stability. Additionally, the shape of a particle can also affect how it interacts with other particles, influencing properties such as viscosity and flow behavior.

5. Are there any exceptions to the rule of most particles being spherical?

Yes, there are some exceptions to the rule of most particles being spherical. For example, some crystals have a non-spherical shape due to their internal structure. Additionally, man-made particles, such as microplastics, can have a variety of shapes depending on how they were formed. However, spherical particles are still the most common shape in nature due to their favorable energetic arrangement.

Similar threads

I Nuclear form factor, the graph F2(q) vs. q (fm-1)
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
794
I Energy reduction/deflection of beta particles due to isotope geometry
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
899
I What would a hypothetical quark-quark collision yield?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Particle lifetime (half-life) question
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
1K
I Virtual particles and Heisenberg
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
10
Views
1K
B Matter/antimatter hybrid atomic structures?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
21
Views
3K
A question about wave/particle duality
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
5
Views
2K
B Can alpha radiation make other materials radioactive?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
B How hard have they banged on quarks, electrons, etc.?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
17
Views
1K
A What determines particle size in an atomizing spray nozzle?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top