1. Sub Quantum Echo Particles...(SQEP's) & Sub Quantum Echo Particle Kinetic Resonance Flux

[swansont]

1 minute ago, Imagine Everything said:

Hey Swansont, hope you're well.

Thanks for that. It makes a more sense now.

Can I ask, does it go all the way from K -> Z ? Or would Z live in the realm of undiscovered heavier elements?

I'm assuming without knowing better that these shells are filled the initial 2 & then they have 8 electrons before needing to have another shell for more electrons?

There are theoretically an infinite number of shells, but they tend to switch to numbers when you have excited states. In physics I rarely used this lettering convention, and in chemistry you’re often only worried about the occupation of the lowest states, but (as you note) we haven’t identified anything that goes that far. 

[Imagine Everything]

Thanks

What is the physics term for these shells called?

[Mordred]

Electron shell is the physics name 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_shell

[Imagine Everything]

Thanks Mordred

[studiot]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

You can call it either one, just like a helium nucleus is also known as an alpha particle

 

It is good to have another member of the staure of swansont making comments here.

 

5 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Sorry that wasn't as dumb as it might have sounded, I mean nucleus with the proton with the  electron orbiting. I imagine without an electron orbiting it would simply be a free proton?

Just a few points to add.

 

The electron has an electric charge of -1   and the proton has an electric charge of  +1

Hydrogen has one electron and one proton; helium has two electrons and two protons.

So the hydrogen ion (the atom with the electron removed) has a charge of +1

Helium has two electrons and two protons

The the helium ion (alpha particle) with two electrons removed has an electric charge has a chrage of +2

 

As swansont noted the hydrogen ion (which is very common in chemistry and responsible for acid - alkali reactions)
doesn't remain alone for very long before it is attached to something else.
In water for instance it attaches to the nearest water molecule to form what is called the hydroxonium ion.
This ion therefore has a +1 charge with a chemical symbol H₃O⁺

As regards shells.

There are two shell theories.

There is an electron shell theory, which is what you have been discussing.

And there is a nuclear (or proton) shell theory to explain how the nucleus fits together.

 

As regards the electron shell theory, it is probably best to take a simpler approach as in the attachments.

Chemical reactions occur between some of the electrons of the participating atoms and molecules.
The atoms are regarded as trying to get to a configuration of a nearby noble or inert gas.

This configuration is called the core configuration .

The extra electrons are the one or ones that participate in chemical reactions and chemical bonding.

But the wrinkle is that the 'shells' have a substructure, labelled s, p, d , e and f These are called orbitals.

and the energy levels of these do not follow in a nice sequence because we now know that the shape of these subshells and indeed the shells themselves are not arranged in nice expanding spherical shells.
Wiki has some nice pictures.
There is some ovelap.

 

Also I have been avoiding responding about Newton's cradle until you have finished wandering around the galaxy.

It is rather complicated but an excellent introduction to several ideas we have yet to look at, including what is called the coefficient of restitution.
Really the analysis depends upon this as to whether it is regarded a elastic or inelastic or something inbetween.

 

 

 

Edited Friday at 01:49 PM by studiot

[Imagine Everything]

Thanks Studiot

In the pages you scanned, is the 'core' the nucleus?

And all the elements listed on the left are the elements that make the named cores?

Can you also tell me the signs used for boundary condition, state & quantum tunneling please.

 

Edited Friday at 02:23 PM by Imagine Everything

[studiot]

18 minutes ago, Imagine Everything said:

Thanks Studiot

In the pages you scanned, is the 'core' the nucleus?

And all the elements listed on the left are the elements that make the named cores?

 

No, most definitely not.

The nucleus is about protons (and neutrons)

Ions, chemical reactions and bonding is about electrons.

The nuclear structure does not change in the formation of ions or in other chemical reactions or or chemical bonding.

 

The tables I posted are about the electron structure.

 

The core is the electron structure of the inert gas. See the title of the table.

Remember we mentioned these gases in a more simple way some posts back.

So it works like this.

Look at the top of the first table to the first 'block'

There are just two elements in the 1s shell  hydrogen and helium.

This shell has only room for 2 electrons.

We have already said that hydrogen has 1,  and helium has 2 electrons.

Helium is the first inert gas.

The second block is Lithium (Li) to Neon (Ne)

Neon is the second inert gas and note the core is labelled Helium core.

That means that these 8 elements (yes including the inert neon) have a full 1 shell plus extra electrons in the 2 shell, but no electrons in 3 shell.

Repeat Neon has a full 2 shell but not electrons in the 3 shell.

The next block - sodium (Na) to Argon (Ar) works the same way populating the 3 shell (but not fully since there is now another subshell labelled 3d).
This block is labelled to have a neon core

 

Does this help ?

 

[Imagine Everything]

7 minutes ago, studiot said:

Does this help ?

 

Probably, I will re read it a few times to try and understand it better.

I miss stuff sometimes, (can't see the woods for the trees as it were)  science  can be a quite mystifying & immensely confusing lol

I'm also a bit confused as to why it goes 1s, 2s, then 2p, 3s, 3p etc

Why isn't it all s's? Have I missed or not seen something somewhere?

Edited Friday at 02:37 PM by Imagine Everything

[studiot]

41 minutes ago, Imagine Everything said:

Probably, I will re read it a few times to try and understand it better.

I miss stuff sometimes, (can't see the woods for the trees as it were)  science  can be a quite mystifying & immensely confusing lol

I'm also a bit confused as to why it goes 1s, 2s, then 2p, 3s, 3p etc

Why isn't it all s's? Have I missed or not seen something somewhere?

It's good that you are puzzling it.

That is a step towards working a bit out for yourself which you have now done a couple of times.

I try to leave some easy bit like that but I never object to you asking like this if you need more.

 

The first shell (no 1) has only s one 's' subshell; no p, d e or f 

The second shell (no 2) has one 's' subshell and actually 3 'p' subshells; no d e or f

The third shell (no3) has one s subshell, 3 'p' subshells and 5 'd' subshells; no e or f

 

If you look at the left hand page -  fig 16  - this is not only an energy diagram of the relative energies of these subshells it also shows you how many there are in each main shell (count the circles).

 

The text also describes the standard method on writing these., where it syas 1s²2s² 2p⁶ etc;  the superscript is the number of electrons in the subshell  eg there are 6 electrons in the 3 number p subshells in each main shell.

Sorry I don't have time for pictures now as to how these numbers arise, other than to say it is because of the shape of the subshells, perhaps next time.

Edited Friday at 03:14 PM by studiot

[Imagine Everything]

2 hours ago, studiot said:

Sorry I don't have time for pictures now as to how these numbers arise, other than to say it is because of the shape of the subshells, perhaps next time.

This made me smile, thanks Studiot, I think I kind of understand the 1s2, 2s2, 3s2 (sorry for the lazy writing there)..still learning this part but I'm sorry, why isn't called 1s, 2s, 3s, 4s..I don't understand the named shell sequence. My head is looking for the pattern but doesn't understand it.

If s means shell , what does p mean  And e, f, d etc

I understand the orbital part i think just not why it is called p or e or d or f.

Atm my head is thinking that this is like saying a numerical count (not science related) 1, 2, 3, 4 r, s, t, u, 7, 8, 9, 10 instead of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.

 

[studiot]

5 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

This made me smile, thanks Studiot, I think I kind of understand the 1s2, 2s2, 3s2 (sorry for the lazy writing there)..still learning this part but I'm sorry, why isn't called 1s, 2s, 3s, 4s..I don't understand the named shell sequence. My head is looking for the pattern but doesn't understand it.

If s means shell , what does p mean  And e, f, d etc

I understand the orbital part i think just not why it is called p or e or d or f.

Atm my head is thinking that this is like saying a numerical count (not science related) 1, 2, 3, 4 r, s, t, u, 7, 8, 9, 10 instead of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.

 

This site draws better pictures than I do and answers a few more questions as well.

 

https://byjus.com/chemistry/shapes-of-orbitals/

[Imagine Everything]

7 hours ago, studiot said:

This site draws better pictures than I do and answers a few more questions as well.

 

https://byjus.com/chemistry/shapes-of-orbitals/

Thank you

 

Q6

What does P orbital stand for?

The s, p, d, and f, respectively stand for sharp, primary, diffuse and fundamental. The letters and words refer to the visual impression left by the spectral lines’ fine structure that occurs because of the first relativistic corrections, particularly the spin-orbital interaction.

Now it makes sense though I also now have more orbital understanding to do.

 

Can nucleai and their electrons be seen as states and if so, does that mean they each also have their own boundary conditions?

Can nucleons be seen as states with boundary conditions of their own?

 

Edited yesterday at 06:05 AM by Imagine Everything

[Mordred]

A state can be any set of variables or functions that describe a system but must apply only to the system without any previous history such as  path taken previous temperature, energy level etc

A state will evolve in time but it is set at whatever moment in time it's being examined at.

It can be any particle or combination of particles including atoms or any field treatment. 

Now that automatically has a boundary condition that boundary being time dependent (the state condition depends on how evolves over time)

Whatever other boundary conditions depends on what the state system is describing by those variables or math functions.

Mathematically these are constraints on the valid ranges the mathematics of the state are accurate. 

Simple example a state is like a math set but with equations and variables etc. So say the equation only is accurate for a given range

(3,4,5,,6) only that is a constrained set hence has a boundary condition. However if no additional constraint range can be infinite (,except time dependency)

In thermodynamics and physics it's useful to define closed states and  conserved states. A conserved system must be closed. Studiot is more practiced at classical thermodynamic systems and that's one of the better stepping stones to learning states as well as thermodynamics.

As it teaches the same requirements for what is needed for a state to be conserved 

We do however standardized symbology to go with states

\(|\vec{a}\rangle\) is initial vector field a (ket)

\(\langle \vec{a}|\) is after state vector a (bra)

The above is called Dirac Bra-ket notation you have a transpose (an operand or function between the bra and ket

\[\lange \vec{a}|transpose|\rangle|]

Now that's a quick and dirty on bra-ket notation 

Common states

\(|\phi\rangle\)  = scalar field ie magnitude only 

(\|\psi\rangle\) is often a complex conjugate field such as a spinor field

 

Edited yesterday at 07:20 AM by Mordred

[Imagine Everything]

Thanks Mordred

 

I read somewhere that someone (Einstein was it?) wondered if an atom worked similar to a solar sytem. Sorry I can't remember exactly, anyway I'm looking more intensely now at these orbits, electron shells, tetraquarks, quarks and stuff and can't help but wonder if our universe is merely a giant version of all these things that exist at their tiniest form.

What if it was seen universally instead of locally (solar system)

Expansion causes expansion causes expansion as it were. I'm not just thinking about universe expansion but the expansion of everything within and including the universe.

Hmm...What I think I'm trying to say is that hyperthetically speaking, maybe our solar mass is just a huge electron?, maybe DM is just a huge expanse of the space between the electron and the nucleus?, maybe the planets or such like are merely huge protons or similar?, I don't know nearly enough to explain this properly but does that make any sort of sense?

Like maybe the things that are seemingly created, are not neccessarily what they appear to be, they are just another building block on the road to recreating the small into the giant sizes of themselves?

 

I also saw on a science programme that we should theoretically have binary solar masses but for some reason we don't.

Wouldn't that be the equivalent of the first 1s or K shell? Though I don't know what the nucleus would be in that scenario.

This could also be the answer? to the question: What is the point of the universe?

The answer could be there is no point, it just is what it is , just self replicating and replicating and replicating...

hmm...no doubt one of my more zanier imaginations

 

Edited yesterday at 08:18 AM by Imagine Everything

[Mordred]

No problem we cross posted as I was adding details to my last post.

Your referring to the orbitals in the old Bohr model of the atom that's been replaced by the electron shell layout where electrons form probability clouds such as those subshell images on the previous wiki-link.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_shell

See the dumbbell arrangements etc in the image  in that link the old orbit like a solar image isnt accurate the shell system is 

 

Edited yesterday at 07:28 AM by Mordred

[Imagine Everything]

57 minutes ago, Mordred said:

No problem we cross posted as I was adding details to my last post.

Your referring to the orbitals in the old Bohr model of the atom that's been replaced by the electron shell layout where electrons form probability clouds such as those subshell images on the previous wiki-link.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_shell

See the dumbbell arrangements etc in the image  in that link the old orbit like a solar image isnt accurate the shell system is 

 

Thanks

[Imagine Everything]

I'm getting to understand the shells a bit better now, hopefully I'll remember

 

If K(1s) L(2s,2p) M(3s,3p,3f) and so on have a math definite of 2n². (did I say that correctly?)

Is it also true in reverse not with electrons but with quarks?

It's very confusing and seemingly very busy in these shells and their orbits.

So when you talk of half spin, does that literally mean an electron in a subshell is only orbiting half of it's orbit?

Also, I'm a little confused by the s orbital

Why doesn't it also have w? going from the top left diagonal to the bottom right diagonal?

This scientist is talkign about the octet rule and says that it usually means the outermost shell (the electron shell?) can have a maximum of 8 electrons, but the diagram shows 2 electrons on the outermost shell when the subshell m can have up to 18.

Does this mean that even if the 2n² applies that even if a subshell can have up to 18+ electrons, it can't if it is the outermost shell.

Am I right in calling the outermost shell the electron shell?

Do isotopes only go downwards by neutrons 6/8 6/6 6/4 for example (Pro/Neu)

Edited 4 hours ago by Imagine Everything