Science Junkie
What keeps electrons from falling into the nucleus of an atom?
At the intra-atomic level, classical mechanics and electromagnetism are no longer valid: electrons are not balls that orbit around the nucleus, they are more aptly described  by a probability distribution. So it’s necessary to analyse this systems’ behaviour using quantum mechanics. Therefore:
Bound systems can exist only for discrete values of energy —as per Schrödinger equation.
The ground-state (lowest-energy state) can’t correspond to a stationary particle state —as per the uncertainty principle.
This implies that the electrons’ ground-state can’t be the one that corresponds to electrons “fallen” in the nucleus. Consequently, their ground-state should have higher energy, that coincides to a state at finite distance from the nucleus. 
In other words: there are energy levels forbidden to an electron and the level that would coincide with the nucleus is one of these.
Image: [x]  -  Asked by dolems

What keeps electrons from falling into the nucleus of an atom?

At the intra-atomic level, classical mechanics and electromagnetism are no longer valid: electrons are not balls that orbit around the nucleus, they are more aptly described  by a probability distribution. So it’s necessary to analyse this systems’ behaviour using quantum mechanics. Therefore:

  • Bound systems can exist only for discrete values of energy —as per Schrödinger equation.
  • The ground-state (lowest-energy state) can’t correspond to a stationary particle state —as per the uncertainty principle.

This implies that the electrons’ ground-state can’t be the one that corresponds to electrons “fallen” in the nucleus. Consequently, their ground-state should have higher energy, that coincides to a state at finite distance from the nucleus. 

In other words: there are energy levels forbidden to an electron and the level that would coincide with the nucleus is one of these.

Image: [x]  -  Asked by dolems







  1. itsjustgalvin reblogged this from science-junkie
  2. hello-language-that-is-all reblogged this from science-junkie
  3. karkatshouting reblogged this from theprophetlemonade
  4. theprophetlemonade reblogged this from science-junkie
  5. multiverseofawesomeness reblogged this from science-junkie
  6. e-rythraean reblogged this from science-junkie
  7. mega-question-guy reblogged this from science-junkie
  8. layzcreature0 reblogged this from science-junkie
  9. godmindlove reblogged this from science-junkie
  10. juguini reblogged this from thatscienceguy
  11. bi-lakaifa reblogged this from andrewxabyss
  12. siriusblackismylover reblogged this from andrewxabyss
  13. andrewxabyss reblogged this from science-junkie
  14. dreaming-six-dimensions reblogged this from science-junkie
  15. invictascientia reblogged this from anthroreference
  16. hierosatori reblogged this from science-junkie
  17. poopy-shmoops reblogged this from science-junkie and added:
    Do these patterns coincide with stronger or weaker bonds between atoms?
  18. vonzimofancy reblogged this from anthroreference
  19. leecheezus reblogged this from erwinshrodinger
  20. erwinshrodinger reblogged this from science-junkie
  21. igugras reblogged this from personificationoflaziness
  22. kingofno1 reblogged this from thatscienceguy
  23. artiste9999 reblogged this from science-junkie
  24. killthemallthelawyers reblogged this from nwbwr
  25. gazolli reblogged this from thatscienceguy
  26. bookwormpony reblogged this from science-junkie
  27. 4670k reblogged this from thatscienceguy