The Space Between Atoms

On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 9:22:34 AM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:
Bill Gill:
You are talking about the Bohr atom.

Bohr had an atom!? Why, when I was a kid we couldn't afford atoms, had
to settle for free electrons.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

What Is An Atom?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3I1JGW-Ck

StarDust wrote:
On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 2:39:15 PM UTC-7, Mike Collins wrote:
StarDust On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 10:45:14 AM UTC-7, Bill Gill wrote:
On 9/14/2016 8:43 AM, StarDust wrote:
Every one talks about empty space. That's why smaller wave lengths,
like x-ray can go through a body and used for imaging. Electrons don't
fill the space between atoms, only gravitational bounding occur.
The force that holds the electrons to the nucleus is the electromagnetic
force, not the gravitational force. the EM field is what fills the
atom and holds it together. Space is not empty.

Bill

A force field is not physical matter! If two magnets floats above each
other, there's a gap between them, its' empty space. Assuming act upon
each other in vacuum!


Is a proton physical matter?

Is a neutron physical matter?

Is an electron physical matter?

Yes, if it has mass! Atomic mass is the mass of protons and neutrons .
Electron are too small so it's not used for calculation. That's how I
learned in chemistry 40 years ago!
Of course protons are made up of smaller particles, quarks. But that's another story!

Mass number is the number of protons and neutrons in an atom, and it
tells us about the mass of the atom in amu, or atomic mass units. Atomic
weight is the average mass of all the isotopes of a certain type. It is a
weighted average that takes into account the abundances of all of the different isotopes


At my secondary school were taught that an electron had 1/1837th of the
mass of a proton.

My point is that electrons, protons and neutrons are components of matter.

Electrons orbitals are not orbits. They have no bounds and the orbital
shapes we are shown are just maximum probability locations. The whole the
electrons of an atom are anywhere in the extra nuclear atom (and with tiny
probability outside it).
Talk of empty space in an atom has some meaning but using that statement is
too much of a simplification and, as has already been said, harks back to
the discredited Bohr atom as a kind of miniature solar system.
Chemists should be able to visualise S, P, D and F orbital shapes to be
able to understand bonds and reactions. The Bohr atom is not a helpful
concept.
Don't ask me to do the maths. It's been more than 40 years since my
chemistry degree.

On 9/14/2016 5:02 PM, StarDust wrote:
On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 2:39:15 PM UTC-7, Mike Collins wrote:
StarDust On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 10:45:14 AM UTC-7, Bill Gill wrote:
On 9/14/2016 8:43 AM, StarDust wrote:
Every one talks about empty space. That's why smaller wave lengths,
like x-ray can go through a body and used for imaging. Electrons don't
fill the space between atoms, only gravitational bounding occur.
The force that holds the electrons to the nucleus is the electromagnetic
force, not the gravitational force. the EM field is what fills the
atom and holds it together. Space is not empty.

Bill

A force field is not physical matter! If two magnets floats above each
other, there's a gap between them, its' empty space. Assuming act upon
each other in vacuum!


Is a proton physical matter?

Is a neutron physical matter?

Is an electron physical matter?

Yes, if it has mass! Atomic mass is the mass of protons and neutrons . Electron are too small so it's not used for calculation. That's how I learned in chemistry 40 years ago!
Of course protons are made up of smaller particles, quarks. But that's another story!

Mass number is the number of protons and neutrons in an atom, and it tells us about the mass of the atom in amu, or atomic mass units. Atomic weight is the average mass of all the isotopes of a certain type. It is a weighted average that takes into account the abundances of all of the different isotopes

What you learned 40 years ago doesn't have much to do with what
we know today. Most physicists will tell you that what you learned
was a massive over simplification. You need to study what they
are teaching now, not what they were teaching 40 years ago.

Bill

StarDust wrote:
On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 9:22:34 AM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:
Bill Gill:
You are talking about the Bohr atom.

Bohr had an atom!? Why, when I was a kid we couldn't afford atoms, had
to settle for free electrons.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

What Is An Atom?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3I1JGW-Ck


I see your video and raise you with:



https://youtu.be/FfngYhl7ZmI

On Wednesday, 14 September 2016 08:47:04 UTC-4, Bill Gill wrote:
On 9/13/2016 11:18 PM, RichA wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 September 2016 09:52:10 UTC-4, StarDust wrote:
On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 6:07:31 AM UTC-7, Bill Gill wrote:
On 9/12/2016 11:13 PM, StarDust wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kypne21A0R4

We are and everything around us are f**** empty space!
So, don't think too much of yourself holographic humanoids!












Actually we are mostly full of fields, which are
what keep everything working. There is no such
thing as empty space.

Bill

Energy fields!
As the video says, if an atom is magnified to the size of Cambridge university's yard, matter inside would be the size of a grain of sand.
Mostly empty space!

Better analogy of an orbital system would be our solar system. Large orbits (just not spherical) with little matter between Pluto and the Sun.

You are talking about the Bohr atom. That has been replaced
by a whole new model.
The problem is that the location of the electrons in the
atom are unknown. All we calculate is an approximation. That's
basic Quantum Mechanics (QM). The electrons are described as wave
functions that fill the whole atom. There is no empty space.

Bill

A description I heard decades ago was that they "orbited to prescribe a sphere" making no mention of relative positions.

On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 3:41:43 PM UTC-7, Mike Collins wrote:
StarDust On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 9:22:34 AM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:
Bill Gill:
You are talking about the Bohr atom.

Bohr had an atom!? Why, when I was a kid we couldn't afford atoms, had
to settle for free electrons.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

What Is An Atom?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3I1JGW-Ck


I see your video and raise you with:



https://youtu.be/FfngYhl7ZmI

Thx! It's new to me! Video I posted says , the number of positively charged protons decide where the matter is in the periodic table. This Dude saying, type of orbital shape decides the sequence of the periodic table!
Still, I think electrons don't fill the space between atoms nuclei!

StarDust wrote:
On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 3:41:43 PM UTC-7, Mike Collins wrote:
StarDust On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 9:22:34 AM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:
Bill Gill:
You are talking about the Bohr atom.

Bohr had an atom!? Why, when I was a kid we couldn't afford atoms, had
to settle for free electrons.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

What Is An Atom?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3I1JGW-Ck


I see your video and raise you with:



https://youtu.be/FfngYhl7ZmI

Thx! It's new to me! Video I posted says , the number of positively
charged protons decide where the matter is in the periodic table. This
Dude saying, type of orbital shape decides the sequence of the periodic table!
Still, I think electrons don't fill the space between atoms nuclei!



One of the comments on the video gives an analogy which I paraphrase:
The blades of a spinning fan occupy a large volume. A electron also
occupies a large volume. The fan has a defined position at any time. The
electron does not - it's everywhere in it's orbital.
Understanding chemistry involves knowing the basics of molecular orbital
theory which begins with the shape of the S, P, D and F orbitals.
The Bohr atom is now used only as a simplification for schoolchildren.

On Thursday, September 15, 2016 at 3:39:00 AM UTC-7, Mike Collins wrote:
StarDust On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 3:41:43 PM UTC-7, Mike Collins wrote:
StarDust On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 9:22:34 AM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:
Bill Gill:
You are talking about the Bohr atom.

Bohr had an atom!? Why, when I was a kid we couldn't afford atoms, had
to settle for free electrons.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

What Is An Atom?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-3I1JGW-Ck


I see your video and raise you with:



https://youtu.be/FfngYhl7ZmI

Thx! It's new to me! Video I posted says , the number of positively
charged protons decide where the matter is in the periodic table. This
Dude saying, type of orbital shape decides the sequence of the periodic table!
Still, I think electrons don't fill the space between atoms nuclei!



One of the comments on the video gives an analogy which I paraphrase:
The blades of a spinning fan occupy a large volume. A electron also
occupies a large volume. The fan has a defined position at any time. The
electron does not - it's everywhere in it's orbital.
Understanding chemistry involves knowing the basics of molecular orbital
theory which begins with the shape of the S, P, D and F orbitals.
The Bohr atom is now used only as a simplification for schoolchildren.

Yes, I read that! Than for example an S orbital , how does it fill 360 deg spherical space around the nucleus of an atom? S orbital, only extends in 2 direction?