How is hydrogen atom formed?
- Thread starter jcc
- Start date
- Status
Let's hope your question is not another religiously inspired evangelistic mission to try and discredit science....If so, it will be reported as such.
In answer to your question,the general picture we have of as sort of planets orbiting a nucleas is wrong.
Electrons are a funamental particle as far as we know, and governed by quantum theory. There orbital parameters are more seen as indeterminate.
The electron is more accurately pictured as a "cloud of probability" that exists at a particular orbital parameter. eg: If the nucleus was the size of a pea and placed in the middle of a stadium, the electron cloud of probability would be orbiting around the outer grandstand seats.
That's about as best as I can describe it but others will explain in better language.
PS: Hasn't this been asked before by yourself?
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Yes it bloody well has. And it has also bloody well been answered before, both by me and by James.
This halfwit, or troll, or madman has studiously ignored both explanations and now simply repeats his question for a 3rd time. There is clearly NO value in anyone wasting their time by replying, as there is every indication that the reply will similarly be ignored and the same question will come round again, for a 4th time.
Electrons, in atoms, move at high speed, at a significant fraction of the speed of light. This is more obvious with larger atoms and is investigated with a branch of science called relativistic quantum chemistry. This is where near light speed electrons create special relativity effects not explained by the classic wave equations.
For example, the yellow color of Gold is due to the relativistic speed of Gold's outer electrons. The electron speed will cause a relativistic time shift, so the reflected light, ends up with a yellow cast. Gold is special due to electron relativity.
In the case of hydrogen, as the electron tries to get closer and closer, to cancel, like a skater pulling their arms in for their final spin, the electron orbits faster and faster, until relativity starts to cause it to be in another slightly different space-time reference.
In this new reference, its clock and the clock of the proton, are no longer coordinated. Waves have both wavelength and frequency, with the relativistic reference difference, making the positive and negative waves not able to cancel, perfectly; something remains.
The twin paradox of physics has one twin aging faster and the other again slower, so when the meet one is older and the other is younger. The electron and proton sort of lose connection in time due to time dilation so the waves can't add perfectly.
For example, the yellow color of Gold is due to the relativistic speed of Gold's outer electrons. The electron speed will cause a relativistic time shift, so the reflected light, ends up with a yellow cast. Gold is special due to electron relativity.
In the case of hydrogen, as the electron tries to get closer and closer, to cancel, like a skater pulling their arms in for their final spin, the electron orbits faster and faster, until relativity starts to cause it to be in another slightly different space-time reference.
In this new reference, its clock and the clock of the proton, are no longer coordinated. Waves have both wavelength and frequency, with the relativistic reference difference, making the positive and negative waves not able to cancel, perfectly; something remains.
The twin paradox of physics has one twin aging faster and the other again slower, so when the meet one is older and the other is younger. The electron and proton sort of lose connection in time due to time dilation so the waves can't add perfectly.
Not wrong* , basically correct up to last sentence I quoted. Gold is yellow because does not reflect bluish light well or at all when its wave length has the energy difference between the 5d and 6s electrons. That wave length is strongly absorbed driving the 5d to 6s state transition. White light with the blue removed is gold color.
I don't know (and suspect neither do you) what you mean by "relativistic time shift" - shifted wrt to what?
Yes, if one thinks of the 6s electron as point charge oscillating thru the nucleus (it has no angular momentum other than its intrinsic spin) It is, near the nucleus going at near the speed of light - when it passes thru each electron shell more of the 79 nuclear protons are accelerating it towards the nucleus, but this "classical POV" is not correct - it would be stopped at the edge and then fall back again, thru the nucleus once again with an average speed of about half the speed of light, varying mass and momentum at an extremely high rate.
* I said "not wrong" as the 6s - 5d energy gap would not correspond to blue light if there were no relativistic effects, but they do exist and make that the case. Again: what is this "relativistic time shift" and how is making the energy gap smaller - equal to a blue photon? If you were to speak of relativistic mass increase, I would not have much trouble with that as more massive electrons would be closer to the nucleus, like "muonic hydrogen is smaller than proton with an electron bound to it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Below is quote from Wikipedia; Relativistic Quantum Chemistry.
Relativistic quantum chemistry invokes quantum chemical and relativistic mechanical arguments to explain elemental properties and structure, especially for the heavier elements of the periodic table. A prominent example of such an explanation would be the fact that the color of gold (in that it is not silvery like most other metals) is explained via such relativistic effects.
Relativistic effects in chemistry can be considered to be perturbations, or small corrections, to the non-relativistic theory of chemistry, which is developed from the solutions of the Schrödinger equation. These corrections affect the electrons differently depending on the electron speed relative to the speed of light. Relativistic effects are more prominent in heavy elements because only in these elements do electrons attain relativistic speeds.
Beginning in 1935, Bertha Swirles described a relativistic treatment of a many-electron system,[4] in spite of Paul Dirac's 1929 assertion that the only imperfections remaining in quantum mechanics
"give rise to difficulties only when high-speed particles are involved, and are therefore of no importance in the consideration of atomic and molecular structure and ordinary chemical reactions in which it is, indeed, usually sufficiently accurate if one neglects relativity variation of mass and velocity and assumes only Coulomb forces between the various electrons and atomic nuclei."[5]
Theoretical chemists by and large agreed with Dirac's sentiment until the 1970s, when relativistic effects began to become realized in heavy elements.[6] The Schrödinger equation had been developed without considering relativity in Schrödinger's famous 1926 paper.[7] Relativistic corrections were made to the Schrödinger equation (see Klein–Gordon equation) in order to explain the fine structure of atomic spectra, but this development and others did not immediately trickle into the chemical community. Since atomic spectral lines were largely in the realm of physics and not in that of chemistry, most chemists were unfamiliar with relativistic quantum mechanics, and their attention was on lighter elements typical for the organic chemistry focus of the time.[8][page needed]
Dirac's opinion on the role relativistic quantum mechanics would play for chemical systems is wrong for two reasons: the first being that electrons in s and p atomic orbitals travel at a significant fraction of the speed of light and the second being that there are indirect consequences of relativistic effects which are especially evident for d and f atomic orbitals.[6]
Relativistic quantum chemistry invokes quantum chemical and relativistic mechanical arguments to explain elemental properties and structure, especially for the heavier elements of the periodic table. A prominent example of such an explanation would be the fact that the color of gold (in that it is not silvery like most other metals) is explained via such relativistic effects.
Relativistic effects in chemistry can be considered to be perturbations, or small corrections, to the non-relativistic theory of chemistry, which is developed from the solutions of the Schrödinger equation. These corrections affect the electrons differently depending on the electron speed relative to the speed of light. Relativistic effects are more prominent in heavy elements because only in these elements do electrons attain relativistic speeds.
Beginning in 1935, Bertha Swirles described a relativistic treatment of a many-electron system,[4] in spite of Paul Dirac's 1929 assertion that the only imperfections remaining in quantum mechanics
"give rise to difficulties only when high-speed particles are involved, and are therefore of no importance in the consideration of atomic and molecular structure and ordinary chemical reactions in which it is, indeed, usually sufficiently accurate if one neglects relativity variation of mass and velocity and assumes only Coulomb forces between the various electrons and atomic nuclei."[5]
Theoretical chemists by and large agreed with Dirac's sentiment until the 1970s, when relativistic effects began to become realized in heavy elements.[6] The Schrödinger equation had been developed without considering relativity in Schrödinger's famous 1926 paper.[7] Relativistic corrections were made to the Schrödinger equation (see Klein–Gordon equation) in order to explain the fine structure of atomic spectra, but this development and others did not immediately trickle into the chemical community. Since atomic spectral lines were largely in the realm of physics and not in that of chemistry, most chemists were unfamiliar with relativistic quantum mechanics, and their attention was on lighter elements typical for the organic chemistry focus of the time.[8][page needed]
Dirac's opinion on the role relativistic quantum mechanics would play for chemical systems is wrong for two reasons: the first being that electrons in s and p atomic orbitals travel at a significant fraction of the speed of light and the second being that there are indirect consequences of relativistic effects which are especially evident for d and f atomic orbitals.[6]
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Yes, my understanding is that it is an increase in mass of the electron that causes a shrinking in the size of orbitals, compared to what one would expect from the non-relativisitc treatment. Like you, I don't immediately see where time dilation comes into it.
Special relativity deals with the impact of velocity on distance, time and mass. As we move at the speed of light, time slows, distance contract and relativistic mass will increase. The relativistic mass increase will make the outer electron of gold heavier, so it orbits closer. This will shift the orbital slightly.
There is also time dilation and distance contraction effects going on, that impacts external waves being reflected. It does not matter which color of light you shine on gold, red to violet, they all end with a yellow cast. It is not a specific energy transition that will have a yellow cast, but all the colors will have the yellow cast.
The electron configuration of gold is shown below: Notice it has one unpaired 6s electron. It has an unpaired S electron, like sodium or potassium, yet gold is nearly inert to any chemical reaction. This can also be explained with relativity. The extra S electron is in a different reference, than most of the reactive things, like oxygen.
Mercury is also relativistic atom, that is a liquid metal. Mercury has no problem binding to gold, like water to cloth because they are both in a similar space.
There is also time dilation and distance contraction effects going on, that impacts external waves being reflected. It does not matter which color of light you shine on gold, red to violet, they all end with a yellow cast. It is not a specific energy transition that will have a yellow cast, but all the colors will have the yellow cast.
The electron configuration of gold is shown below: Notice it has one unpaired 6s electron. It has an unpaired S electron, like sodium or potassium, yet gold is nearly inert to any chemical reaction. This can also be explained with relativity. The extra S electron is in a different reference, than most of the reactive things, like oxygen.
Mercury is also relativistic atom, that is a liquid metal. Mercury has no problem binding to gold, like water to cloth because they are both in a similar space.
Last edited:
False. Light is reflected by conductive metals via interaction with their "free electrons." But blue light matches the energy difference shown in your diagram to be absorbed, by driving the 6s electron into the 6p state so unlike all other colors (and near UV and all IR wavelenths too) gold does not reflect blue light photons well - it absorbs them.
Sunlight probably has the energy in near UV photons equal to the gap 6s to 7s but those states both have zero angular momentum (or spin 1/2 if you want to include that) and the photon needs to give the absorber the angular momentum it carries - conservation of moment. I.e. an "s state" can only be exited to a "p state" by absorption of a photon. (Collisions with an electron can do most any thing as electon can have what ever momentum change, including zero I think, is needed. I.e. their speed could change and their direction of travel too as the absorber atom's momentum could too. It gets complex but some way total momentum will be conserved for an isolated atom. If not isolated, then only energy must be conserved.)
As I told you in earlier post: gold in approximately white light has the color it does because all the wave lengths except blue are well reflected and none is changed into a gold wavelength as your ignorantly assert. I.e. red wave length photons reflect as red light, etc. Why not try your assertion with an experiment - not hard to shine light from a red LED* on a piece of gold. Then come back and thank me for the correction.
* Modern cars have red LED tail lights - do test with one some dark night. A gold ring and the white paper it is setting on will both look red in color.
BTW "gold color" is not the presence of any "gold wave length" but the ABSENCE of blue ones from white light. Spread a beam of white light out with a prism and first note there is yellow but no gold color on sheet of paper in the spectrum on it. Then with only narrow strip of paper blocking the blue light and second prism inverted wrt to the first, re combine all the light passing thru the first sheet of paper (slots cut out to let it except for the blue pass thru first sheet of paper) on to the second prism. The re-unified beam is a gold colored beam as it emerges from the second prism.
Thanks again, for the 100th time?, for giving me to opportunity to teach some physics without appearing pedantic. As far as I am concerned, you are one of the most useful posters here - I'm glad your band is over.
Last edited by a moderator:
I found this quote;
The quantum bit of the story tells us that the color of metals such as silver and gold is a direct consequence of the absorption of photons by d electrons. This photon absorption results in d electrons jumping to s orbitals. Typically, and certainly for silver, the 4d→5s transition has a large energy separation requiring ultraviolet photons to enable the transition. Therefore, photons with frequencies in the visible band have insufficient energy to be absorbed. With all visible frequencies reflected, silver has no colour of its own: it's reflective, an appearance we refer to as 'silvery'.
Now the relativistic bit. It is important to realize that electrons in the s orbitals have a much higher likelihood of being in the neighborhood of the nucleus. Classically speaking, being close to the nucleus means higher velocities (cf speed of inner planets in solar system with that of the outer planets).
For gold (with atomic number 79 and hence a highly charged nucleus) this classical picture translates into relativistic speeds for electrons in s orbitals. As a result, a relativistic contraction applies to the s orbitals of gold, which causes their energy levels to shift closer to those of the d orbitals (which are localized away from the nucleus and classically speaking have lower speeds and therefore less affected by relativity). This shifts the light absorption (for gold primarily due to the 5d→6s transition) from the ultraviolet down to the lower frequency blue range. So gold tends to absorb blue light while it reflects the rest of the visible spectrum. This causes the yellowish hue we call 'golden'.
This explanation uses relativity to cause a shift in the outer electron position; from S to D. This allows the electron to be impacted by photons in the visible range; blue in particular. I call this a time shift, because the frequency of the absorbing light slows from UV to blue; compared to non relativistic. They both say the same thing.
As is commonly the case with wellwisher's posts, this one is a dangerous combination of half truths and outright nonsense.
The explanation cut-and-pasted in post #16 is much better. The cut-and-paste in post #12 is accurate, although only peripherally relevant.
There's no such thing as "being in a slightly different space-time reference". That's just something wellwisher made up. So is the stuff about positive and negative waves in the atom (waves of what?). And the part about electron and proton waves "adding".
If this nonsense was posted in a Science section of the forum, wellwisher's post would count as a point toward being excluded from posting in those sections.
where did you find that? As I recall the radiative selection rules, that d to s is not even allowed as is a change of two in angular momentum but photon brings only one unit - a violation of conservation of momentum.
Without any energy scale on your drawing, I guessed the 6s to 7p transition corresponded to blue light absorption but it could be the 5d to 7p, as that is also a permitted radiative change but your source's 5d to 7s is forbidden.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Strictly speaking, electric dipole forbidden. Some transitions break the simple selection rules. But I do not know whether this transition is one of them.
Can you give any example that is not due to a third body, often an electron passing near the radiator so that the orbitals are disturbed and it can help conserver momentum?
- Status