Well when the quantum mechanics of the graviton and the neutron hit the proton on the periodic table, the electron orbitals (according to the scientists in Sweden film moving electron for the first time) emit protons, neutrons and electrons. The discovery of the electron led to "Killer electrons in space (seriously).
The electron configurations by Federico Franchi's Electron binds molecules, while breaking and making chemical bonds.
So... Electrons travel through wormholes, right? And they're falling through just the right size of wormholes that light can't help but get sucked through... If our electron is making up an atom, those photons will be stuck with those electrons relatively forever... (but relative to what! ha ha!)
Welp, I just covered rainbows, magnets, electricity, chemistry, computers, life, and information.
If, in an hydrogen atom representation, the cloud around the nucleus is the electron itself in that energy state, how do we represent two electrons in the same shell? Are they "on top" of each other or what?
@magichristo Two electrons in the same "cloud" differ in their spin quantum number, and the interaction between their spins and their orbital angular momentum results in a tiny energy difference in the two electrons. Look up "spin-orbit interaction" and "fine structure" for more details.
@cassiopeiaproject At the start of the video it said that no instrument can view an electron, what about in the future? With much more powerful machines?
@Singerazboi100 It is not a question of power. Think of a normal microscope. What is the smallest object you can view using it. Let us assume that it takes one photon hitting the object, resulting in a photon emission that enters the eyepiece to allow you to see the object. When the object gets too small the energy of the photon will impact the object and the ability to observe the object will be affected.
@magichristo To answer your question, although chemists use the linear combination of atomic orbitals as a way to look at it, this model is simplistic. The model basically states that each electron occupies it's own hydrogen-like orbital and this is the representation ingrained on all of our notions of an atom.
However, the truer picture is that you must look at the electrons in an atoms as one collective structure...i.e. there is only one electron wavefunction.
I believe I saw somewhere that electrons move s chaotically at high speeds, that they can be in more than one place at a time? If so, wouldn't that defy the laws of physics?
Is the reason element s with a whole lot of protons are unstable because the force from the electrons orbiting above push it close enough to the nucleus induce it to the weak force?
@VicTheMouth No. The protons themselves each have a positive electric charge and so they repel each other. A battle ensues between the strong nuclear force trying to hold the protons together and the repulsive electric force trying to tear it apart.
@cassiopeiaproject Ok, so the large number of protons means the electrons have to try harder to keep the atom stable and therefore fail more often and easily in large atoms?
An atom is usually considered unstable when there are more than 84 protons inside the nucleus. Also, if protons exceeds neutrons or vice versa, the atom would also be considered unstable.
@TehOwnerer999 No, the electron is not a boson and is not a force carrier. And it is not a combination of other things, but is a fundamental particle by itself.
electron - Question; is it possible for electrons to bond to each-other, maybe for purpose of greater energy allowing it to operate further from nucleus or for larger mass giving a larger charge. i would assume electrons would alter from element to element
electron - Question; is it possible for electrons to bond to each-other, maybe for purpose of greater energy allowing it to operate further from nucleus or for larger mass giving a larger charge. i would assume electrons would alter from element to element
@CrazyStoners No. The only attractive force that electrons experience towards other electrons is gravity, and gravity is not strong to bind them together over the much stronger electromagnetic repulsive force.
electron - Question; is it possible for electrons to bond to each-other, maybe for purpose of greater energy allowing it to operate further from nucleus or for larger mass giving a larger charge. i would assume electrons would alter from element to element
Oh, Bosons are particles like Photons, Gluons, W and Z and so forth. Always move at the speed of light. Fermions are made mostly of Quarks, like Protons and Neutrons. Leptons, like the Neutrinos and Electons, are an exception. They are similar to Quarks, but can travel at different speeds under the right circumstances. All particles *must* move, but composite particles, like the fermions, don't. The Quarks inside move in teeny circles, so they move without going anywhere. Electrons do the same.
The only property that determines which statistical family a particle belongs to is its spin. Integer spin objects (including spin-zero) are bosons; half-integer spin objects are fermions. This rule is true from quarks to uranium atoms. The speed with which a particle travels is not related to this property. Particles with no rest mass travel at the speed of light. Particles with a rest mass travel slower than the speed of light.
@sidewaysfcs0718 I recommend you read Brian Greene's book: Fabric of the Cosmos...and....The Elegant Universe....because in ONE of those, he does a great job of showing why the Standard Model is really just an Arbitraty Concoction by particle physicists...its ENTIRELY EMPIRICAL....it is not NECESITATED from first principles...it has many ad hoc features...but dont take my word for it, check out the books
It means that is the smallest mass a particle of that type can have and it is the mass the particle has when it is not moving. When it moves, the mass increases.
*facepalm* Sorry. Should have been more specific. Electrons have a tiny amount of mass. As cassiopeiaproject pointed out, about 0.511MeV. That's 511,000 electron/volts, or about 8.19 x 10−14 joules. Running that back through E=MC^2 and you get about 9.11 x 10-33 grams. In a sense, you can say that particles don't have mass. *Energy* has mass. Photons and the like are energy carriers. Electrons and the like *are* energy in solid form.
Quite the opposite. Charge carriers, like Neutrinos and Photons *always* move at the speed of light. But, particles like fermions (electrons, protons, neutrons) can travel at any speed in between. The faster they move, the more energy they need, just like accelleraing a car. And, since energy is mass, the faster they go, the more massive they seem. Rest Mass simply means that mass (energy) a particle has if all the mass given by adding extra energy by accelleration is removed.
Go check cassiopeaprojects video on "Standard Model"... and it needs more than an update to account for gravity, but also to reduce the oddball particles that keep cropping up and have to be shoehorned into odd places. As a physicist of some renown once said "It's a ZOO!"
question. Electrons emit EM radiation when changing 'n' values with respect to the nucleus. However, when the electrons are stripped from the nucleus and are in a bound state, such as in a cathode ray tube, how do the electrons emit EM radiation?
Within a cathode ray tube, electrons moving at constant speed do not emit EM radiation. However, when they impact the screen they collide with other phosphorus atoms, exciting the electrons within atom, which in return, emit radiation.
I really really want to know what an electron is. This video was interesting, but I still don't understand what a "charge" is supposed to be. I know what it means to charge my cellphone, but I just don't understand electrons. But I really want to.
An electron is a fundamental particle -- a building block of matter with certain observable properties. One of these properties, its electric charge, causes it to be attracted to particles with opposite electric charge and to be repelled from particles with like electric charge. An electric current can be thought of as a flow of electrons -- each carrying an electric charge.
Ok, so when electrons move lets say from one end of a wire to another they do so because they are being attracted to particles with the opposite amount of charge on the other side? I might have a lot of monatanous questions, but I will appreciate any information you have time to give me. To be honest I woke up the other day, and I wanted to invent something, but then realized that I knew nothing about electricity which brought me to inquire about electrons.
When you charge your cellphone battery, you are forcing electrons to move into a storage configuration that can be used later to provide energy as they are allowed to move back again.
That's a pretty bold response Brian; are you absolutely sure of that? Does that include their quantum states? You may wish to clearify what you mean by "identical"!
The intrinsic properties of every electron are identical with those of every other electron. Electric charge, weak charge, mass, spin, lepton number, etc. are the same for every electron; so if two electrons have the same dynamical properties, they are indistinguishable.
thumbs up if you think the graviton is the best and coolest one here
MR1QUEST 2 months ago
This description is so wrong.... so primitive :/
There are no separate force......they're all the same. They even all share the same name "xxx Force"
*jedi mind trick* you know I'm right .
chibraxial 3 months ago
@chibraxial
Stop polluting the internet
JFStarwood 1 month ago
Well when the quantum mechanics of the graviton and the neutron hit the proton on the periodic table, the electron orbitals (according to the scientists in Sweden film moving electron for the first time) emit protons, neutrons and electrons. The discovery of the electron led to "Killer electrons in space (seriously).
The electron configurations by Federico Franchi's Electron binds molecules, while breaking and making chemical bonds.
Rotemetoot 8 months ago
I'm sorry but I do not observe the universe as complex as you stated.
Dogmaf2008 8 months ago
You call the electron 'fundamental', which implies that it is discrete and irreducible. Is this not a naive interpretation?
I ask because we know that quarks interact (are created and destroyed) in, for instance, beta decay, and out of this interaction an electron appears.
There was no electron before the decay. Now there is. Is that fundamental or is this just a simplistic description?
Huttate1 8 months ago
So... Electrons travel through wormholes, right? And they're falling through just the right size of wormholes that light can't help but get sucked through... If our electron is making up an atom, those photons will be stuck with those electrons relatively forever... (but relative to what! ha ha!)
Welp, I just covered rainbows, magnets, electricity, chemistry, computers, life, and information.
What do I win?
MetalSpiral 8 months ago
If, in an hydrogen atom representation, the cloud around the nucleus is the electron itself in that energy state, how do we represent two electrons in the same shell? Are they "on top" of each other or what?
magichristo 1 year ago
@magichristo Two electrons in the same "cloud" differ in their spin quantum number, and the interaction between their spins and their orbital angular momentum results in a tiny energy difference in the two electrons. Look up "spin-orbit interaction" and "fine structure" for more details.
cassiopeiaproject 1 year ago
@cassiopeiaproject At the start of the video it said that no instrument can view an electron, what about in the future? With much more powerful machines?
Singerazboi100 11 months ago
@Singerazboi100 It is not a question of power. Think of a normal microscope. What is the smallest object you can view using it. Let us assume that it takes one photon hitting the object, resulting in a photon emission that enters the eyepiece to allow you to see the object. When the object gets too small the energy of the photon will impact the object and the ability to observe the object will be affected.
Now, what do you use to observe an electron?
Huttate1 8 months ago
@magichristo To answer your question, although chemists use the linear combination of atomic orbitals as a way to look at it, this model is simplistic. The model basically states that each electron occupies it's own hydrogen-like orbital and this is the representation ingrained on all of our notions of an atom.
However, the truer picture is that you must look at the electrons in an atoms as one collective structure...i.e. there is only one electron wavefunction.
SamKalirai 6 months ago
nice animation
az34ize 1 year ago
Sorry, " electrons move _s_ chaotically..." is supposed to be " move so..."
L3G0TWK 1 year ago
I believe I saw somewhere that electrons move s chaotically at high speeds, that they can be in more than one place at a time? If so, wouldn't that defy the laws of physics?
L3G0TWK 1 year ago
Is the reason element s with a whole lot of protons are unstable because the force from the electrons orbiting above push it close enough to the nucleus induce it to the weak force?
VicTheMouth 1 year ago
@VicTheMouth No. The protons themselves each have a positive electric charge and so they repel each other. A battle ensues between the strong nuclear force trying to hold the protons together and the repulsive electric force trying to tear it apart.
cassiopeiaproject 1 year ago
@cassiopeiaproject Ok, so the large number of protons means the electrons have to try harder to keep the atom stable and therefore fail more often and easily in large atoms?
VicTheMouth 1 year ago
@VicTheMouth
An atom is usually considered unstable when there are more than 84 protons inside the nucleus. Also, if protons exceeds neutrons or vice versa, the atom would also be considered unstable.
acousticisforbitches 1 year ago
@acousticisforbitches Thanks for the info :)
VicTheMouth 1 year ago
Thanks for uploading. It's amazing how utterly small these things are.
VicTheMouth 1 year ago
Habla en español coño!!!
srbadm 1 year ago
Am i right to say that the electron is a weak nuclear force gauge boson combined with an electromagnet gauge boson (photon boson)?
TehOwnerer999 1 year ago
@TehOwnerer999 No, the electron is not a boson and is not a force carrier. And it is not a combination of other things, but is a fundamental particle by itself.
cassiopeiaproject 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
electron - Question; is it possible for electrons to bond to each-other, maybe for purpose of greater energy allowing it to operate further from nucleus or for larger mass giving a larger charge. i would assume electrons would alter from element to element
CrazyStoners 1 year ago
electron - Question; is it possible for electrons to bond to each-other, maybe for purpose of greater energy allowing it to operate further from nucleus or for larger mass giving a larger charge. i would assume electrons would alter from element to element
CrazyStoners 1 year ago
@CrazyStoners No. The only attractive force that electrons experience towards other electrons is gravity, and gravity is not strong to bind them together over the much stronger electromagnetic repulsive force.
cassiopeiaproject 1 year ago
electron - Question; is it possible for electrons to bond to each-other, maybe for purpose of greater energy allowing it to operate further from nucleus or for larger mass giving a larger charge. i would assume electrons would alter from element to element
CrazyStoners 1 year ago
Oh, Bosons are particles like Photons, Gluons, W and Z and so forth. Always move at the speed of light. Fermions are made mostly of Quarks, like Protons and Neutrons. Leptons, like the Neutrinos and Electons, are an exception. They are similar to Quarks, but can travel at different speeds under the right circumstances. All particles *must* move, but composite particles, like the fermions, don't. The Quarks inside move in teeny circles, so they move without going anywhere. Electrons do the same.
RyuDarragh 2 years ago
The only property that determines which statistical family a particle belongs to is its spin. Integer spin objects (including spin-zero) are bosons; half-integer spin objects are fermions. This rule is true from quarks to uranium atoms. The speed with which a particle travels is not related to this property. Particles with no rest mass travel at the speed of light. Particles with a rest mass travel slower than the speed of light.
cassiopeiaproject 2 years ago
I bow to tha master of phraseology :) That's why I don't teach. The COIK syndrome is my bane :P
RyuDarragh 2 years ago
W and Z dont move at light speed , they have mass ....alot of it
sidewaysfcs0718 2 years ago
True enough. And one of the reasons I think the Standard Model needs some updating :P
RyuDarragh 2 years ago
u still dont understand some stuff ur making some confusions
the only update the standard model needs is gravity ....
sidewaysfcs0718 2 years ago
@sidewaysfcs0718 I recommend you read Brian Greene's book: Fabric of the Cosmos...and....The Elegant Universe....because in ONE of those, he does a great job of showing why the Standard Model is really just an Arbitraty Concoction by particle physicists...its ENTIRELY EMPIRICAL....it is not NECESITATED from first principles...it has many ad hoc features...but dont take my word for it, check out the books
LV07TSK 1 year ago
That is my future home waiting to be built...............happiness to all!
higherhappiness 2 years ago
WAIT?? ELECTRONS HAVE MASS WAHHHH??? I thought electrons were massless, not tiny mass, but massless?
xXDominoXx 2 years ago
Electrons have a rest mass of 0.511 MeV - about 1/1800 the mass of a proton.
cassiopeiaproject 2 years ago
@cassiopeiaproject what is a "rest mass"
does that mean they only have a mass if they are resting?
xXDominoXx 2 years ago
It means that is the smallest mass a particle of that type can have and it is the mass the particle has when it is not moving. When it moves, the mass increases.
cassiopeiaproject 2 years ago
@cassiopeiaproject ah ok
xXDominoXx 2 years ago
@cassiopeiaproject What would happen if you smashed electrons together in an accelerator?
whoatemyhummus 1 year ago
Photons and a few other particles are massless. Like neutrinos, photons have no intrinsic mass.
RyuDarragh 2 years ago
that's did not answer my question at all...
and was totally irrelevant to my question...
xXDominoXx 2 years ago
*facepalm* Sorry. Should have been more specific. Electrons have a tiny amount of mass. As cassiopeiaproject pointed out, about 0.511MeV. That's 511,000 electron/volts, or about 8.19 x 10−14 joules. Running that back through E=MC^2 and you get about 9.11 x 10-33 grams. In a sense, you can say that particles don't have mass. *Energy* has mass. Photons and the like are energy carriers. Electrons and the like *are* energy in solid form.
RyuDarragh 2 years ago
@RyuDarragh ah ok,
but if an electron slows down, does it gain more mass?
what does the "rest mass"mean, does that mean if an electron is moving faster is has less of a mass?
xXDominoXx 2 years ago
Quite the opposite. Charge carriers, like Neutrinos and Photons *always* move at the speed of light. But, particles like fermions (electrons, protons, neutrons) can travel at any speed in between. The faster they move, the more energy they need, just like accelleraing a car. And, since energy is mass, the faster they go, the more massive they seem. Rest Mass simply means that mass (energy) a particle has if all the mass given by adding extra energy by accelleration is removed.
RyuDarragh 2 years ago
neutrinos dont move at light speed ...and there is no sucj thing as "charge particles" ...almost all particles have charge..
photons dont have any charge but move at light speed
gluons have color charge but move at light speed ...
sidewaysfcs0718 2 years ago
Go check cassiopeaprojects video on "Standard Model"... and it needs more than an update to account for gravity, but also to reduce the oddball particles that keep cropping up and have to be shoehorned into odd places. As a physicist of some renown once said "It's a ZOO!"
RyuDarragh 2 years ago
that*
xXDominoXx 2 years ago
question. Electrons emit EM radiation when changing 'n' values with respect to the nucleus. However, when the electrons are stripped from the nucleus and are in a bound state, such as in a cathode ray tube, how do the electrons emit EM radiation?
serrra14 2 years ago 2
Within a cathode ray tube, electrons moving at constant speed do not emit EM radiation. However, when they impact the screen they collide with other phosphorus atoms, exciting the electrons within atom, which in return, emit radiation.
barsoapdish 2 years ago 4
I really really want to know what an electron is. This video was interesting, but I still don't understand what a "charge" is supposed to be. I know what it means to charge my cellphone, but I just don't understand electrons. But I really want to.
DiminishedStudios 2 years ago
An electron is a fundamental particle -- a building block of matter with certain observable properties. One of these properties, its electric charge, causes it to be attracted to particles with opposite electric charge and to be repelled from particles with like electric charge. An electric current can be thought of as a flow of electrons -- each carrying an electric charge.
cassiopeiaproject 2 years ago
Ok, so when electrons move lets say from one end of a wire to another they do so because they are being attracted to particles with the opposite amount of charge on the other side? I might have a lot of monatanous questions, but I will appreciate any information you have time to give me. To be honest I woke up the other day, and I wanted to invent something, but then realized that I knew nothing about electricity which brought me to inquire about electrons.
DiminishedStudios 2 years ago
In the ultimate analysis yes. Do a search on "galvanic cell" to get a more complete description.
cassiopeiaproject 2 years ago
When you charge your cellphone battery, you are forcing electrons to move into a storage configuration that can be used later to provide energy as they are allowed to move back again.
cassiopeiaproject 2 years ago
Are the valence electrons any different than the ones closer to the nucleus in the atom?
faerie130 3 years ago
No. All electrons in the entire universe are identical.
cassiopeiaproject 3 years ago
That's a pretty bold response Brian; are you absolutely sure of that? Does that include their quantum states? You may wish to clearify what you mean by "identical"!
DustyMay1944 2 years ago
The intrinsic properties of every electron are identical with those of every other electron. Electric charge, weak charge, mass, spin, lepton number, etc. are the same for every electron; so if two electrons have the same dynamical properties, they are indistinguishable.
cassiopeiaproject 2 years ago