shape of atoms

[jamiestem]

What shape are atoms?

[swansont]

To the extent that this is answerable, it would be the shape of the orbitals of the outer electrons. http://www.chemcomp.com/journal/molorbs.htm

 

However, since the electron is not localized, I think one can argue that asking for the shape is somewhat of an ill-defined question, though not as bad as asking for the shape of a liquid or a gas.

[jamiestem]

So the spherical diagrams we grew up with are just representations? ok. Thanks.

[ghijk]

There is one interesting comparation - if an atom is a cathedral, his nucleus would be a small bee in the centre of it. The most of atom's volume is empty.

Edited March 28, 2011 by ghijk

[michel123456]

To the extent that this is answerable, it would be the shape of the orbitals of the outer electrons. http://www.chemcomp.com/journal/molorbs.htm

 

However, since the electron is not localized, I think one can argue that asking for the shape is somewhat of an ill-defined question, though not as bad as asking for the shape of a liquid or a gas.

 

Your link is about molecular orbital. Is that the same with atomic orbital?

[swansont]

Figure 1 of that link depicts atomic orbitals.

[zapatos]

 

Orbitals of a carbon atom, as seen by a field-emission microscope.

 

Image: From "Imaging the atomic orbitals of carbon atomic chains with field-emission electron microscopy," by I. M. Mikhailovskij, E. V. Sadanov, T. I. Mazilova, V. A. Ksenofontov and O. A. Velicodnaja, in PHYSICAL REVIEW B, Vol. 80, NO. 16; October 2009

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-shape-of-atoms

[michel123456]

From wiki atomic orbital

Atomic orbitals exactly describe the shape of this "atmosphere" only when a single electron is present in an atom. When more electrons are added to a single atom, the additional electrons tend to more evenly fill in a volume of space around the nucleus so that the resulting collection (sometimes termed the atom’s “electron cloud” [3]) tends toward a generally spherical zone of probability describing where the atom’s electrons will be found.

Emphasis mine.

 

Isn' that the answer to the OP question?

[jamiestem]

Looks like a sphere, I mean not perfect but basically a sphere shape, but that's not a 3-d representation so I'm just guessing. I just think if little things like atoms are spherical and large things like planets are spherical, and the universe is infinite. Then maybe we are all connected and all one.

 

That the sun is a giant atom, and the earth is just the dust of an atom, and we live on that dust, and then infinitely, if we could just imagine that the process is slowed down to the speed we are experiencing it at. Things orbitting around atoms with life on them if we only had better microscopes. I've seen pictures of atoms with orbital rings around them, from the smallest to the largest we are all connected. Planet to atom, atom to sun.

 

Is this already known? I mean it has to be that a planet is related to an atom in a sense that they both are round and have orbitals? Our universe could be the atomic structure of a larger thing that we can't see cause we are too small, just as it doesn't know of us cause we are too small, just as we don't know of the things that live in the orbits of atoms cause they are too small.

[michel123456]

Let mods correct me:

what I understand from the world, universe included, is that what happens in the small scale is different from the large scale. An atom is different from a planetary system, and a planetary system is different from a galaxy. In-between, we are different from an atom and from the Sun. Not 2 things happen to be the same as much you go along the scales. If the structure of an atom seems to ressemble that of the sun, it is mainly because we use the one to explain the other, not because they are the same. They are fundamentaly different.

 

And that is a complete mystery to me: why is it that way? I would prefer a system that repeats the same structure over and over, like a fractal. But it does not seem to be like that. The Universe has a structure.

[jamiestem]

Cool. I picture it like a pattern that keeps repeating with slight variations each time, the things orbiting atoms, the moon orbiting the earth, the earth orbiting the sun and the sun orbiting something else thats orbiting something else, an endless swirl of sorts.

[Horza2002]

It will depend on what atom you ar lookign at and to which orbtials you are actually filling. S-orbitals are indeed spherical about the nucleus, but p-, d-, f-, etc orbitls are not. If they are not all symmetrically filled, then the electron density around the nucleus will not be. I.e. if you onyl fill the p_x and p_y orbitals, then there will be no electron density in the z-plane.

 

Another example is that of cobalamine (otherwise known as Vitamin B₁₂). During its reaction cycle, the central cobalt atom exists as Co(I)...the unpaired electrons are in the d_z² orbitals which points in one direction only...in this case, the atom electron density would not look spherical.

 

Id also should point out that the planets are not spheres....they are squashed slightly and bulge and the equators. Also remember that the electrons are not orbiting an atom in the same sence that an planet orbits the sun (and again for very differenet reasons).

Edited March 29, 2011 by Horza2002

[Hearts]

Perhaps it was how they drew atoms in books or show on tv. It was based on a old model if I'm not mistaken, not extremely accurate but good for explaining things.

My chem teacher told me that the electrons are not necessarily located in the those fixed orbitals , they just are more probable to be there. Heck the electron of an atom could be halfway across the universe (or maybe I'm exegerating too much?) but it will be extremely unlikely. And yea, not all orbitals are spherical, only the S ones, if I remember.

I'm also rusty though, anyone feel free to correct me.

[Airbrush]

What speed does an electron move around a nucleus?

[lemur]

If the structure of an atom seems to ressemble that of the sun, it is mainly because we use the one to explain the other, not because they are the same. They are fundamentaly different.

I have the idea that they are more similar that might be thought at first. After all, wouldn't the interior pressure of the sun be so high, due to its gravity, that atoms would be compressed beyond their electron shielding? I don't know if that is correct, but I always think that the interior of the sun would have relatively unshielded protons interacting with each other at high energy levels and sometimes fusing as the energy overcomes the level of proton-proton repulsion. So could it not be accurate to describe the sun as an enormous macro-molecule whose protons are in the process of converting into heavier nuclei?

[jamiestem]

I'm telling you, it's all related, from the smallest thing we know to the biggest thing we know.

[swansont]

The sun is a plasma; the protons aren't part of atoms, so there is no electron shielding from any atomic structure.