Notices
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: rutherford model of the atom

  1. #1 rutherford model of the atom 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3
    As Rutherford did not use a Boscovitch approach to an explanation of the gold foil experiment, we are left with the nonsence of the orbiting electron.

    Consider the following:
    [1] Kinetic theory requires elastic billard balls.
    [2] Electrons under Newtonian mechanics and coulombic forces orbit in planes see above.
    [3] An electron in such an orbit when colliding with another atom will because of its lightness shoot off into space.
    [4] the absurdities are hidden under the mysticism of schroedingers' equation.

    There is more so much more I am just
    trying to find e fellow doubter.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope MagiMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,440
    Your doubts do not change how the universe works. Skepticism is health, but honest skeptics accept evidence over gut feelings. Schrodinger's equation is well supported by evidence.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Re: rutherford model of the atom 
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by jwclancy
    As Rutherford did not use a Boscovitch approach to an explanation of the gold foil experiment, we are left with the nonsence of the orbiting electron.
    I am not quite sure about what you are trying to say. No scientist that has at least some insight into atom physics thinks that the old Bohr model of orbiting electrons is actually correct. It only yields correct results in some aspects for the hydrogen atom.
    Quote Originally Posted by jwclancy
    Consider the following:
    [1] Kinetic theory requires elastic billard balls.
    [2] Electrons under Newtonian mechanics and coulombic forces orbit in planes see above.
    They don't. That's a fact verified by experiments.
    Quote Originally Posted by jwclancy
    [3] An electron in such an orbit when colliding with another atom will because of its lightness shoot off into space.
    Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It depends on the energies involved. The mass and gravitational forces are quite irrelevant. The dominating force is the electrical force. If what you are claiming were true, then every time you jump and hit the ground again, you would ionise your shoes and the floor.
    Quote Originally Posted by jwclancy
    [4] the absurdities are hidden under the mysticism of schroedingers' equation.
    There is no mysticism involved. This equation can be derived from more fundamental laws of physics. It is not easy, but possible. See e.g.: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0610121
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    404
    may i be so bold to suggest that there would be ionization to some degree (even if really small) when you jump as atoms and electrons are so tiny they wouldn't require much energy to move from one shell to the next?

    Static electricity is transmitted from the shoes to the finger tips and that is ionization?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    I like the MO theory.

    Here's a couple interesting links:

    Molecular Orbital Theory pt. 1

    MO theory
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by fatman57
    may i be so bold to suggest that there would be ionization to some degree (even if really small) when you jump as atoms and electrons are so tiny they wouldn't require much energy to move from one shell to the next?

    Static electricity is transmitted from the shoes to the finger tips and that is ionization?
    Well, okay. Maybe you could call it ionisation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    404
    lol

    they way I always related to it is by asking the question 'what is the dominating factor in my frame of reference'

    so even though there will be LOTS of electrons flying all over the place all the time in terms of what I am describing it might not be the key or dominating effect/issue.

    Electron orbits always got me - its like asking the question how close do atoms get when they bind, best explination I have found is that it is a model which relates to the physical universe with a good degree of accuracy but isn't necessarily what is really there................



    Useful for this thread are the experiments with high energy lasers to cool matter - after they get to below zero kelvin they say things get a little strange down there!

    Superfliuds might also be relevant to above? What really happens to the matter at those temperatures and how does the electron orbit come into it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope MagiMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,440
    "Below 0 Kelvin" doesn't make sense and has never happened. Laser cooling can get things very close to 0, but not below it. Still, some weird things can happen at those temperatures.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Bachelors Degree x(x-y)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    462
    I thought it was impossible to achieve below 0 Kelvin- correct me if I'm wrong but isn't 0 K absolute zero, -273.15C, where the volume of gases reaches 0 and so is impossible to decrease further- you can't have minus volume?

    Also, doesn't the third (or is it second) law of thermodynamics suggest that it is impossible to get to absolute zero...?
    "Nature doesn't care what we call it, she just does it anyway" - R. Feynman
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by x(x-y)
    I thought it was impossible to achieve below 0 Kelvin- correct me if I'm wrong but isn't 0 K absolute zero, -273.15C, where the volume of gases reaches 0 and so is impossible to decrease further- you can't have minus volume?

    Also, doesn't the third (or is it second) law of thermodynamics suggest that it is impossible to get to absolute zero...?
    Correct. This is a theoretical value that can only be achieved asymptotically.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope MagiMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,440
    Some aspects of temperature always made me wonder whether it'd be better represented on a logarithmic scale. (Though I suppose that's not too relevant to the discussion.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •