How adequate is this analog hydrodynamic gravity model?

[MasterOgon]

I'm trying to come up with an analog gravity model based on my old experiment. It's in the picture above. It's a vibrating boat on the water. In the center is a motor, on it is a pendulum with a magnet. A rod with another magnet is rigidly attached to the motor from below, the poles of which are opposite to those on the pendulum. This gives a temporary acceleration to the pendulum when it passes the magnet, and as a result, the system oscillates asymmetrically. All this is installed on a float and launched into the water. The resulting force of asymmetric oscillations creates thrust when the hull interacts with water.

Hydrodynamics is a separate topic here.
In short, when the hull shifts, the turbulent zone collapses, which gives an impulse and a reflected wave.
The direction of the vibration boat's movement should logically be perpendicular to the rod, as the pendulum lever is applied during acceleration. And this happens if you compensate by adding the same, but in fact this vibration boat moves in the direction of the magnet on the rod, as the arrow indicates. Probably due to the displacement of the barycenter of the system. Plus some twisting in the direction of the pendulum rotation.

Below is an imaginary experiment with two conventional atoms. They have an equal number of charges, but their electrons, having a negative charge, repel each other and enter into resonance, avoiding getting closer as shown in the picture. In this case, each of them approaches the positively charged nucleus of the neighboring atom in turn, which causes its temporary acceleration similar to the pendulum of a vibrating boat. Because of this, the atoms oscillate asymmetrically just like a vibrating boat.

Provided that the subatomic environment, forming virtual photons and interacting with the atoms, creates the same wave effect as water, the atoms will be mutually attracted.

I have not yet decided to complicate things. What do you think? To what extent does this correspond to the ideas about atoms?

 

[studiot]

1 hour ago, MasterOgon said:

 

I have not yet decided to complicate things. What do you think? To what extent does this correspond to the ideas about atoms?

There is no polarity involved in gravity.

[Genady]

7 hours ago, MasterOgon said:

each of them approaches the positively charged nucleus of the neighboring atom in turn

No, they do not. Electrons in atoms do not have orbits.

[studiot]

Just now, Genady said:

No, they do not. Electrons in atoms do not have orbits.

Indeed the electrons in both the Bohr orbital model and qhantum models suffer the opposite effect, which has significant consequency in the chemistry of atoms and molecules.

It is called the electrostatic  screening or shielding effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shielding_effect

 

Folks so often forget the effect of the other electrons in an atom or molecule when considering the actions of one single electron.

[MasterOgon]

3 hours ago, studiot said:

There is no polarity involved in gravity.

Can you explain to me what exactly you mean by polarity here?

2 hours ago, Genady said:

No, they do not. Electrons in atoms do not have orbits.

Yes, I know. But as far as I know, in atoms, electrons also represent shells in which their position changes. Couldn't this orbital model be a simplified 2D representation of a shell, in which changes the position of the electron?

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Indeed the electrons in both the Bohr orbital model and qhantum models suffer the opposite effect, which has significant consequency in the chemistry of atoms and molecules.

It is called the electrostatic  screening or shielding effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shielding_effect

 

Folks so often forget the effect of the other electrons in an atom or molecule when considering the actions of one single electron.

Important remark: It turns out that the heavier the element and the more shielding shells it has, the weaker the electron of a neighboring atom can interact with its nucleus.  

But I am confused by the fact how can you determine the position of the electron if it occupies the entire spherical space of the shell? 

[Genady]

18 minutes ago, MasterOgon said:

electrons also represent shells in which their position changes

No, electrons in atoms do not have definite positions.

[MasterOgon]

In this case, I can make the following assumption regarding my model: The electrons of two atoms interact with each other by repulsion, and by analogy with a mechanical device, this leads not to acceleration but to deceleration of the pendulum near the neighboring atom. This also causes asymmetry in the oscillations.In the experiment, the vibrating boat moved more efficiently precisely at low speeds because the asymmetry of the oscillations was greater. Thus, the interaction of the electron with the nucleus of the neighboring atom can be excluded and the attraction continues to work anyway.

7 minutes ago, Genady said:

No, electrons in atoms do not have definite positions.

Why then is it said differently here: In chemistry and atomic physics, an electron shell may be thought of as an orbit that electrons follow around an atom's nucleus. 

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

Or in other words: The electron shell of an atom is the region of space where electrons are most likely to be found. Which is pretty much the same thing 

[Genady]

14 minutes ago, MasterOgon said:

Which is pretty much the same thing

It is not the same thing at all. One is a region of space, correct, the other is a position of an electron, incorrect.

[exchemist]

28 minutes ago, MasterOgon said:

In this case, I can make the following assumption regarding my model: The electrons of two atoms interact with each other by repulsion, and by analogy with a mechanical device, this leads not to acceleration but to deceleration of the pendulum near the neighboring atom. This also causes asymmetry in the oscillations.In the experiment, the vibrating boat moved more efficiently precisely at low speeds because the asymmetry of the oscillations was greater. Thus, the interaction of the electron with the nucleus of the neighboring atom can be excluded and the attraction continues to work anyway.

Why then is it said differently here: In chemistry and atomic physics, an electron shell may be thought of as an orbit that electrons follow around an atom's nucleus. 

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

Or in other words: The electron shell of an atom is the region of space where electrons are most likely to be found. Which is pretty much the same thing 

That article is poorly written. The term “orbital” was devised precisely because electrons in an atom do not have definite orbits. This is due to their wavelike nature or, to put it another way, to the uncertainty principle. 
 

On the more general issue of this modelling attempt of yours, I have difficulty seeing what it is for. You initially referred to gravity, but this seems to be some kind of attempt to reproduce the effect of electromagnetic interactions between atoms. Which is it?

[studiot]

Just now, MasterOgon said:

Can you explain to me what exactly you mean by polarity here?

Polarity means positive and negative, as with electricity and magnetism, (though we call magnetic polarity north seeking and south seeking)

Gravitational attraction is always positive.

Please note that the force of electrostatic attraction is vastly stronger than gravity at atomic and molecular distances.

Quote

https://www.npl.washington.edu/av/altvw149.html

Gravity is an extremely weak force.  Consider two spheres that are close together, each with one kilogram of mass and one coulomb of electric charge, i.e., one unit each of charge and mass in Standard International Units.   There will be electrical repulsion pushing them apart and gravitational attraction pulling them together, but which is bigger?  It's no contest: the electric force between these spheres is 1.35 x 10²⁰ times stronger than the gravitational force.  But perhaps this difference is so large because Standard International Units depend on some rather arbitrary choices on the size of units.  What about fundamental particles?

OK, if we separate a pair of electrons by, say, a nuclear diameter, how big are the forces?  Here the difference is even worse.  The electric force between these electrons is 2.40 x 10⁴³ times bigger than the gravitational force.  In other words, electricity is almost a trillion-trillion-trillion-trillion-trillion times stronger than gravity.

 

Just now, MasterOgon said:

Important remark: It turns out that the heavier the element and the more shielding shells it has, the weaker the electron of a neighboring atom can interact with its nucleus.  

But I am confused by the fact how can you determine the position of the electron if it occupies the entire spherical space of the shell? 

Please note that most substances (matter) occur as molecules not individual atoms.

You have drawn the typical 'miniature solar system' representation of two atoms with several or many electrons, also called the Bohr atom.

This is perfectly adequate for this discussion.
 

You can consider the electrons as little balls moving round so fast that they can be considered 'smeared out', over the shell and take an average.

 

But I also commented

Just now, studiot said:

Folks so often forget the effect of the other electrons in an atom or molecule when considering the actions of one single electron.

Hence my offering about shielding.

 

[MasterOgon]

27 minutes ago, Genady said:

It is not the same thing at all. One is a region of space, correct, the other is a position of an electron, incorrect.

This is quite enough. The magnet on the motor also takes up some space.

13 minutes ago, exchemist said:

That article is poorly written. The term “orbital” was devised precisely because electrons in an atom do not have definite orbits. This is due to their wavelike nature or, to put it another way, to the uncertainty principle. 
 

On the more general issue of this modelling attempt of yours, I have difficulty seeing what it is for. You initially referred to gravity, but this seems to be some kind of attempt to reproduce the effect of electromagnetic interactions between atoms. Which is it?

Although the electron has a wave nature, a wave, such as a sea wave, can be reproduced in a simplified mechanical way. The uncertainty of the electron's position can be due to the fact that there is no possibility track what exactly is going on there. After all, if the pendulum on the motor spins too fast, it will also turn into a cloud of probabilities for the human eye. 

The essence of the model is to explain gravity through electromagnetism. Although these two directions are considered separately, as far as I know there is currently no consistent theory of gravity.

 

[Genady]

6 minutes ago, MasterOgon said:

The magnet on the motor also takes up some space.

Unlike the motor, electron does not take up that space. 

[MasterOgon]

15 minutes ago, studiot said:

Gravitational attraction is always positive.

In my model, electrons and nuclei have polarity as required by electromagnetism, but relative to each other, atoms are neutral in this sense. In this case, the forces that arise as a result of electromagnetic interaction here lead only to the attraction of atoms, but not to repulsion.

Regarding screening, as I have already said, the model can be changed by eliminating the interaction of electrons with the nuclei of neighboring atoms, and instead they will interact with their electrons slowing down for a while rather than speeding up. 

19 minutes ago, Genady said:

Unlike the motor, electron does not take up that space. 

In that case, what is it doing there?

[Genady]

12 minutes ago, MasterOgon said:

In that case, what is it doing there?

It has a probability amplitude to be there.

[MasterOgon]

1 minute ago, Genady said:

У него есть амплитуда вероятности там находиться.

The motor pendulum can also have a probability of being in a certain area, can't it? What does amplitude mean in this case?

[studiot]

Just now, MasterOgon said:

In my model, electrons and nuclei have polarity as required by electromagnetism, but relative to each other, atoms are neutral in this sense. In this case, the forces that arise as a result of electromagnetic interaction here lead only to the attraction of atoms, but not to repulsion.

Regarding screening, as I have already said, the model can be changed by eliminating the interaction of electrons with the nuclei of neighboring atoms, and instead they will interact with their electrons slowing down for a while rather than speeding up. 

I'm glad you understand that your are trying to create a model.

However you are relying on two features, present in the model, but not present in gravity.

 

Firstly polarity, as I have already said.

Your vibration relies on alternate attraction and repulsion to work

Gravity has only attraction, but never has repulsion.

Secondly, again as I have already said and you have now ignored twice, the distances over which gravity acts effectively are very different from the distances in your model.

 

So your model is inappropriate.

[Genady]

4 minutes ago, MasterOgon said:

The motor pendulum can also have a probability of being in a certain area, can't it?

The motor pendulum, classically, has probability 1 to be where it is and probability 0 to be anywhere else. It is not so in quantum mechanics, and it makes a big difference for electron.

 

5 minutes ago, MasterOgon said:

What does amplitude mean in this case?

Probability amplitude - Wikipedia

[MasterOgon]

5 minutes ago, studiot said:

Your vibration relies on alternate attraction and repulsion to work

Gravity has only attraction, but never has repulsion.

Secondly, again as I have already said and you have now ignored twice, the distances over which gravity acts effectively are very different from the distances in your model.

Alternating attraction and repulsion - yes, but the resulting force remains only attraction. Isn't this the desired result?

Regarding the distance. The model works at a distance where there is electromagnetic interaction. In the case of vibrating boats, the effective attraction may be a few centimeters, but here we also have to take into account the mass that the resulting force must move.But I really don’t know how to relate the mass of atoms and the distance at which electromagnetic interaction occurs between them. 

14 minutes ago, Genady said:

The motor pendulum, classically, has probability 1 to be where it is and probability 0 to be anywhere else. It is not so in quantum mechanics, and it makes a big difference for electron.

 

Probability amplitude - Wikipedia

A similar analogy can be made for the pendulum of a motor. Firstly, if it rotates so fast that we see a blurry circle, for us its position is somewhere or another probability.

At the same time, the pendulum can also have areas for us in which it can be found with a higher probability than in others. These are areas where it moves slowly

[Genady]

10 minutes ago, MasterOgon said:

A similar analogy can be made for the pendulum of a motor. Firstly, if it rotates so fast that we see a blurry circle, for us its position is somewhere or another probability.

At the same time, the pendulum can also have areas for us in which it can be found with a higher probability than in others. These are areas where it moves slowly

This analogy is plain wrong. Quantum mechanics is much (!!!) deeper than this.

[MasterOgon]

4 minutes ago, Genady said:

This analogy is plain wrong. Quantum mechanics is much (!!!) deeper than this.

I have no doubt that quantum mechanics is much more complex. It is just a maximally simplified analog model. It would be surprising if I made an exact copy of an atom

[Genady]

2 minutes ago, MasterOgon said:

maximally simplified analog model

... to become inadequate.

[MasterOgon]

2 hours ago, MasterOgon said:

I can make the following assumption regarding my model: The electrons of two atoms interact with each other by repulsion, and by analogy with a mechanical device, this leads not to acceleration but to deceleration of the pendulum near the neighboring atom. This also causes asymmetry in the oscillations.

And in that case, if we talk about boats, they will be repelled and not attracted. I still need to think about this.

Edited yesterday at 05:07 PM by MasterOgon

[studiot]

Just now, MasterOgon said:

Alternating attraction and repulsion - yes, but the resulting force remains only attraction. Isn't this the desired result?

Not quite, if I understand the mechanism of your thrust correctly.

 

Since you have drawn a circular boat ( ie a coracle) I have also indicated one.

Fixed on the edge is a stator', in my case with the North pole facing inwards,

As the centre rotor rotates the axis of its magnet always points along the radius, with its south pole at the put end of the rotating arm or rotor.

As the rotating arm approaches the stator. the stator (and therfor the boat) will experience an increasing sideways pull towards the end of the rotor.

When the rotor passes the stator the pull direction will reverse.

This induces a left - right wiggling to the stator.

However the vector of the force has a component along the line between the wiggles as shown.

~This is your thrust.

So there is a polarity ( in direction) reversal involved.

 

[swansont]

3 hours ago, MasterOgon said:

Why then is it said differently here: In chemistry and atomic physics, an electron shell may be thought of as an orbit that electrons follow around an atom's nucleus. 

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

Or in other words: The electron shell of an atom is the region of space where electrons are most likely to be found. Which is pretty much the same thing 

No, physics and chemistry do not present an orbital as an orbit. Finding an electron in one place is not the same as having a trajectory.

That said, you can induce a dipole moment in atoms, which accounts for e.g. the London dispersion attraction and Debye forces

[MasterOgon]

Asked a few questions to the AI. Here are three excerpts:

“When atoms or molecules approach each other, the electron cloud of one can be polarized by the nucleus of the other, causing a temporary or permanent shift in electron density toward the more charged nucleus.”

“Even at significant distances, weak van der Waals interactions can polarize the electron cloud slightly, creating an asymmetry in the electron density distribution. This can cause the probability cloud to shift or deform slightly toward the neighboring atom.”

“By the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, the more precisely we know the position of an electron (i.e., its probability density), the less precisely we can know its momentum, and hence its kinetic energy. This means that in regions of high probability density, an electron has a large uncertainty in its velocity and momentum, which can lead to an increased kinetic energy.”

In my model, pendulums have greater kinetic energy and speed when passing opposite the nucleus of a neighboring atom, and this may be analogous to a region of high probability density according to the AI text.

In addition, if the orbitals of the model overlap each other, this will create a region in which pendulums will pass alternately, which gives a higher probability of finding them there and this may correspond to a probability cloud when the orbitals of atoms overlap.

Further, in the figure below, it is seen that in regions close to neighboring atoms, the orbitals are compressed and if we imagine the electron as a ball in an orbit, it travels a shorter path, which may mean its greater energy and speed. If so, then this corresponds to the model with pendulums.

In addition, orbitals can be considered as waves coming from the boat. They are also compressed (shorter) in front, in the direction where it is attracted, and expanded (longer) behind

1 hour ago, studiot said:

When the rotor passes the stator the pull direction will reverse.

This induces a left - right wiggling to the stator.

Absolutely right, it happens. As you have drawn, the boat wags its hull like a fish wags its tail due to the displacement of the center of mass that occurs during the interaction of the magnets.