The Naked Scientists
The Naked Scientists
Ask! The Naked Scientists
Question of the Week
SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
Answers to Science Questions
Do an Experiment
Ask a Question
Meet the team
Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side
A new atom model
A new atom model
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
A new atom model
07/02/2011 03:31:24 »
Determinative atom model
The most accepted atom model currently was proposed by Dr. Bohr and by Dr. Schrodinger and Dr. Dirac subsequently [1,2]. However, many phenomenons cannot be explained by Bohr’s atom model. He used Coulomb electric force as the centripetal force to explain the rotation of electrons around nucleus. Another very important basic forces, magnetic force and frame-dragging force (spinnity), were neglected and not included in his atom model. In Schrodinger’s atom model, there are problems limiting the formation of correct atom model such as principle of uncertainty, Schrodinger’s cat, and EPR paradox [3,4]. In this study, a new determinative atom model is proposed to explain atomic phenomenon and to solve above puzzles.
According to a previous important research by Professor Ostuka T, protons and neutrons are rotating separately in an opposite direction in nuclear basal status . This phenomenon can also be confirmed by the semi-empirical mass formula from liquid-drop nuclear model:
Eb=α(v)A-α(s) A^2/3-α(c) Z(Z-1)/A^(1/3) -α(a) (A-2Z)^2/A+δ(A,Z)
In the asymmetric term, the difference of neutron numbers and proton numbers will decrease the nuclear binding energy. This can be explained only when protons and neutrons are packed separately. If they are packed together, there will be no difference in the binding energy. Thus, there are proton subplace and neutron subplace in the nucleus. In addition, when proton group starts to rotate in one direction in nucleus, neutron group will need to rotate in the opposite direction in nucleus based on the conservation of angular momentum. It is worth noting that magnetic moment of proton is +14*10^-27 J/T and the magnetic moment of neutron is -9.7*10^-27 J/T. Positive sign means any proton’s magnetic moment is parallel to its spin, and negative sign means any neutron’s magnetic moment is antiparellel to its spin. Thus, when protons and neutrons rotate in the opposite direction, there will be an attractive magnetic force between them. Thus, the nucleus will be stable and the rotation axis will be fixed. In addition, we know the strong force is represented by Yukawa potential which is related to charge. The formula is:
V(r)= (-Q)/4πϵr e^((-r)/d)
(d: mediator particle diameter=h’/mc)
We can see the nuclear strong force is always an attractive force. If two protons’ distance is enough smaller than the diameter of pion which is the mediator of strong force, then the attractive strong force between the two protons is equal to repulsive Coulomb force. Thus, there is no acceleration for the two protons and protons will be very stable. This is the reason why proton and proton group together in atomic nucleus. The mass of neuron and proton is almost equal. In light atom, proton mass numbers are equal to neutron mass numbers. Thus, proton group angular momentum should be equal to neutron group angular momentum In heavy atom, more protons will have repulsive Coulomb force between each other. Thus, the total diameter (distance) in the proton groups will be larger than that in the neutron group. Thus, there will be more neutrons in nucleus to maintain the equal angular momentum between protons and neutorns.
Frame dragging force (spinnity) is a newly identified force. I propose here that “rest mass produces gravity, spinning mass produces spinnity; rest change produces Coulomb electric force, spinning and moving charge produces magnetism”. Frame dragging effect was derived by Dr. Lense and Thirring to describe the procession of an orbiting object using general relativity . Nobel prize winner Dr. LD Landau also derived orbiting object’s lagrangian around central spinning mass using general relativity . However, these professors didn’t point out that frame dragging is actually a new basic force which has close relation with gravity. When an object has mass, it will have gravity to attract its parts to the center. In order to overcome this continuously centripetal force, the object needs to spin to produce centrifugal force to balance gravity. When the object spins, spinnity occurs. I propose to call this new force “spinnity” because it is a combination of “spin” meaning origin of this force and “ity” meaning basic force. Frame dragging means a spinning mass can drag nearby space-time to rotate around the mass, so it is actually a force which can cause peripheral smaller object to orbit around the central mass according to the basic concept of general relativity Below is the summary of Professor Landau’s derivation from general relativity:
Spinnity F= SJj/r^4
(S=2G/c^2,J=central mass spin angular momentum,j=peripheral mass orbiting angular momentum)
Considering the angle θ between orbiting object and the equator plane of central spinning mass, the formula can be adjusted into:
F= SmJωcosθ/r^2 =ma
Because neutrons or protons are rotating in a speed of 10^20-10^21 1/sec, the spinnity produced by neutrons or protons cannot be neglected. While protons and neutrons are rotating separately in nucleus, we can deduct that all electrons are orbital-rotating in the middle of proton and neutron rotating plane due to the following three reasons:
Protons’ or neutron’s frame-dragging effect(force):
Because protons and neutrons are spinning, they will definitely produce frame-dragging force for the orbital-rotating electrons. The force is given by:
F=SJmW/r2. (S=frame dragging (spinnity) constant=1.5*10^-27, J=angular momentum of protons(neutrons)=kMRWc^2, M=protons(neutrons) mass, R=protons(neutrons) radium, Wc=protons(neutrons) angular velocity, W=electron orbital angular velocity, r=distance between electron and nucleus)
Thus, electrons will tend to rotate in the same direction as proton rotation or neutron rotation. Thus, it can help to maintain all electrons rotating in the middle plane of protons and neutrons rotating plane. We assume that electrons orbiting direction is the same as protons spinning direction first. Because protons and neutrons are spinning in opposite direction, there is no net spinnity field generated:
Net spinnity field= SJ/r^2 -SJ/r^2 =0
Thus, orbiting electrons are not receiving any spinnity force from the atomic nucleus.
The frame-dragging effect of spinning protons or neutrons will provide acceleration on the electrons. Because protons and neutrons are rotating in the opposite direction, the only possibility that electrons won’t be affected by frame-dragging is that electrons are in the middle plane of protons and neutrons rotating plane. Because of frame-dragging acceleration, electrons will finally escape from the atom if the other neutron group or proton group doesn’t provide the opposite frame-dragging force. Only when electrons rotate in the middle plane, the atom can maintain stable.
A new atom model
Reply #1 on:
07/02/2011 03:32:21 »
Thus, we know that all electrons are rotating in the middle plane of protons and neutrons rotation. According to Bohr’s deduction, electrons are rotating around protons because protons provide electric force as centripetal force. And the centripetal Coulomb force is equal to centrifugal force produced by electron’s orbital rotation movement. Viewing from an inertial reference frame, we find that there is a centripetal force during electron’s orbital rotation. However, we know the example of general relativity’s equivalence principle. Thus, the centripetal force observed from inertial reference frame is actually a centrifugal force acted on the electron itself (acceleration reference frame). In order to maintain the electron’s orbit, the centripetal Coulomb force must be equal to the centrifugal force due to electron’s orbit movement. The balance is very important because the electron’s net acceleration then is zero. Thus, the electron won’t radiate energy and fall into nucleus. We can deduct net inward/outward force: Net Fio.
(K=Coulomb constant=9*10^9, Q=proton charges, q=electron charges, r=distance between electrons and protons)
Net Fio= KQq/r^2 -mrω^2=KQq/r^2 -m V^2/r=0
(W=electron’s orbital angular velocity)(7)
When angular momentum is quantized, then the formula is given following:
(n=major quantum number,h’=reduced planck constant=1*10^-34, m=electron mass, V=electron orbital linear velocity)
Thus, we can get:
For example: In hydrogen atom with n=1(innermost orbit) and Q=q=1.6*10^-19coulomb, the value Ve becomes:
Thus, electron orbital linear velocity is less and close to light speed (3*10^8m/sec).
Even the largest atom’s electron linear velocity is smaller than lightspeed. For the atom118, the Ve becomes(Q=118q and n=1):
It is worth noting that the largest atom be possibly formed is Feynanium (Z=137). Due to my modified Bohr atom model, the electron velocity will exceed light speed if atomic number is greater than 137. Based on Dirac equation, the largest atom should have Unseptinum z=173. It is wrong because Dirac equation is wrong.
Total energy emitted from orbiting electron is:
Total E= (-KQq)/r+mV^2/r+1/2 mV^2=1/2 mV^2=13.6ev/n^2
Magnetic force plays an important role in the new atom model. In this new atom model, electric force and magnetic force are serving as two balanced force to control electron movement.
According to Coulomb’s magnetic law, the magnetic force induced by two spinning charges is:
Fm=(μ/4π)*qVs* qVs/r^2 =(K/c^2 ) q^2/r^2 Vs^2
If the paired electrons are spinning in the opposite direction, the magnetic force between them is attractive.
We can deduct net in-between force Fib:
Net Fib=Fc-Fm=(1-Vs^2/c^2 ) (Kq^2)/r^2 =0
(Vs=electron spin linear velocity)
Electron spin velocity (Ve) is light speed to overcome the repulsive electric force. Thus, the net force between the two electrons is close to zero. Because the two paired electrons spin in the different direction, they can be coupled together like two small magnets. Because the paired electrons need specialized spin direction, it is more difficult to pack them compared to unpaired electrons. Thus, it can explain Hund’s law why unpaired electrons are arranged in an atom first. Since the paired electrons are spinning in lightsppeed, one might argue that spinnity produced by paired electrons could affect each other. Here, I need to propose an idea called “cutting gravity line” which is similar to saying magnetism is cutting electricity line. Spinnity is induced by cutting gravity line. Thus, when two electrons with same size are spinning, they won’t cut each other’s gravity line. Thus, they won’t produce spinnity to affect each other.
Pauli’s exclusion principle is saying that no two electrons have the exactly the same quantum number . If two electrons are in the same position, their spinning direction must be different. However, Pauli’s exclusion principle suffers from EPR paradox even the principle is effective. The EPR paradox is saying that: If we move away one of two paired electron to a far away distance. If we check one electron’s spinning direction, the other electron’s spinning direction can be decided at once. Thus, it disobeys the principle of locality of physics. In this new atom model, we infer that two electrons are in the same orbital position rotating around the nucleus. In addition, one electron is a little bit left of the electron orbital rotational plane and the other one is a little bit right of the electron orbital rotational plane.
Electron spin will let them become a small magnet. The spinning direction can decide the direction of magnetism. Thus, the two electrons have different spinning direction, so they can couple together as two small magnets. Thus, EPR paradox is solved. The different spinning direction of two electrons is because they use it to couple each other in the same orbital position. If the two electrons are separated, the spinning direction of the two electrons will be changed. It can explain why Pauli’s exclusion principle is effective
A new atom model
Reply #2 on:
07/02/2011 03:33:14 »
From Bohr’s deduction:
E total= Re/n^2 =(-13.6eV)/n^2
From the Etotal equation, we can infer that the relationship between radius and major quantum number (n). When n=1, r is called Bohr radius(r=1^2). When n=2, r=2^2=4 Bohr radius. When n=3, r=3^2=9 Bohr radius. When n=4, r=4^2=16 Bohr radius. We can also infer the radius of electron rotation. Form inner to outer orbit, the radius should be like 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36. Two electrons can be in the same orbital position. The circumference is 2pir, so the magic numbers can be predicted: 2, 8, 8, 18, 18, 32, 32. It is because that one paired electrons are arranged in a 2pi distance, and then another paired electrons are arranged in a pi distance. It is worth noting that electron can propagate in standing wave. The formation of standing wave is due to opposite propagating wave with same frequency and amplitude. For examples: In 2pi distance, electrons are rotating in clockwise direction (n=2 orbit, totally 8 electrons). In pi distance, electrons are rotating in counterclockwise direction and in the same plane (n=2 orbit, another 8 electrons). It is because only this can let formation of standing wave. Thus, there is no energy loss and atom can be extremely stable. Current quantum mechanics model assume standing wave formation, but it didn’t have two equal waves propagating in opposite direction. Thus, current quantum mechanics theory cannot generate standing wave actually. Thus, we can explain the origin of diamagnetisim. For example, Ar with its electron configuration: 2,8,8. In n=2 orbit with two nodes, Argon’s electrons are both rotating in clockwise direction and counterclockwise direction. Thus, there is no net magnetic moment generated by these orbiting electrons. So, Argon is generally diamagnetic. It can also explain why there is only 2 electrons in n=1 orbit. In the n=1 orbit, only a round circle wave can be formed. Thus, if there are two waves propagating in opposite direction. These two waves will collide each other to prevent to form a standing wave. Thus, in n=1 orbit, electron wave can only propagate in single direction. Because electron movement is like transverse wave, there is a node in pi distance of electron wave. Thus, electrons can be located in pi or 2pi distance. However, packing in pi distance may not be used in an atom. For example, Gold atom(Au) ‘s electron configuration is 2,8,18,18,32,1. In the n=2 orbit, only 8 electrons are packed once. Electron’s movement wavelength should match orbital length. It should be noted in n=1 orbit, the minimal length of n=1 orbit is just 2pi. Thus, only one paired electrons can be packed in n=1 orbit. The standing wave produced by paired electrons in n=1 orbit is just a full circle. In n=1 orbit, packing electrons in pi distance is not allowed. It is worth noting that one paired electrons are located in the node of the standing wave. The paired electrons are receiving opposite and equal force from other electrons located in the right side and left side of the paired electrons. Thus, no net force and no net acceleration is generated. My atom model can also explain why Al(2,8,3) atom radius is less than Li(2,1) atom radius. Although Li atom has less orbiting electrons, both Li atom and Al atom’s outer orbit electrons are in the n=2 orbit which can maximally include 8+8 electrons. Thus, it is not surprising that Li atom radius is slightly larger than Al atom radius since the outer unpaired electron of Li receives less Coulomb attractive force from the Li nucleus. This phenomenon cannot be explained by quantum mechanics.
It is worth noting that the status of multiple electrons in the same orbit. Because of the Coulomb repulsive force, all electrons in the same orbit will repulse each other to maintain equal mutual distances in the same orbit. There is no net Coulomb repulsive force and acceleration. It is because each electron or one paired electrons can have equal and opposite Coulomb force from its two sides. Thus, electrons in atomic orbits are stable.
For many-electron atoms:
Total E= ((Z-j)^2 Re)/n^2
The number Z is the total proton numbers in any given many-electron atom. The number j is the total electron numbers of any given many-electron atom without the valence electrons. Because the inner shell electrons provide an obstacle for valence electrons to obtain protons’ electrostatic force, the inner shell electrons should be subtracted during total energy calculation. After doing this, the centrifugal force from valence electrons’ orbital movement is still balanced with the centripetal force from the net proton charges. The estimated total energy for many-electron atoms is quite accurate. It is worth noting that electrons will expel each other in the valence orbit. Thus, the valence electrons in the outer orbit remain in the electric balance situation. We can use this formula to calculate individual electron in different orbit position. It means that this new atom model is also suitable for many-electron atoms
A new atom model
Reply #3 on:
07/02/2011 03:34:03 »
According to the previous researches, four “quantum numbers” have been identified in atom model. Our new model is also consistent with the four quantum numbers. The first major quantum number is used above to describe the electron radium. The second angular momentum quantum number could be explained by the degree of ellipse orbits of our new atom model. The magnetic quantum number m should be replaced because electrons are rotating in the same plane. Thus, it is not necessary to quantize space of electron orbiting. The four spin quantum number s is because electron is spinning in lightspeed c and the radius of electron is h’/2mc. Our new model has the advantage without the disadvantage of quantum mechanics.
Because electron’s linear velocity is near lightspeed, we should use relativity to adjust the energy formula. Thus,
E=mc^2*[1/(1-V^2/c^2 )^(1/2) -1]
This formula is very similar to Dirac’s formula. I think Dirac’s formula is only an approximation. Actually, electron spin won’t affect the radiation spectrum. My energy formula is the correct exact answer.
Here, I would also like to explain why Klein-Gordon equation derived by Schrodinger equation is correct in many atomic experiments. It is not because Schrodinger equation is correct but because there is screened Coulomb potential. In many electron atoms, we need to consider screen effect of non-adjacent electrons at same orbit. The Klein-Gordon equation is:
[∇^2-(m^2 c^2)/〖h'〗^2 ]φ(r)=0
, which can be derived from relativistic version of Schrodinger equation:
Here, I don’t want to derive it again. If we consider the concept of screened Coulomb potential, we can still get the Klein-Gordon equation.
The screened Coulomb equation function is:
[∇^2-k^2 ]φ(r)=(-Q)/ϵ δ(r)
δ(r)=infinite if r=0 or δ(r) =0 if r><0
Since the distance between non-adjacent electrons are not zero
Since electron diameter=h’/mc=r0
[∇^2-(m^2 c^2)/〖h'〗^2 ] Q/4πϵr e^(-mc/rh')=0
Using my atom model, I can still derive Klein-Gordon equation. The solution of Klein-Gordon equation is very similar to Dirac equation. Because Klein-Gordon equation is very successful in many atomic experiments, it is assumed that Dirac equation and Schrodinger equation are correct. However, it is not so. The satisfactory experimental results can be merely due to the screened Coulomb potential of non-adjacent electrons.
(r=10-11meter, r0=10-13 meter)
er/r0=10-44 which is really small compared to usual Coulomb potential.
Thus, the force between two non-adjacent electrons in the same orbit can be neglected.
A new atom model
Reply #4 on:
07/02/2011 03:34:52 »
We can also use the concept of Compton scattering to obtain particle radius. The Compton scattering equation is:
λ^'-λ=h/mc (1-cosθ )
During scattering, there is a phase delay which is the difference between input wave and output wave. It means the delay that photon is passing through a particle sphere. The phase delay is:
r is particle radius, n is refraction index. When photon is going straight through the particle, the input angle θi=0
n= sinθi/sinθr =0
It means that there is no refraction. Thus, the phase delay during Compton scattering is:
Comparing the Compton scattering equation, we let:
So, there is relation between Compton wavelength (h’/mc) and particle size. My deduction is well correlated with experimental observation.
r*mc= 1/2 h^'
Comparing to Heisenberg’s position-momentum uncertainty principle, we can view mc as the invariance of momentum:
∆X*∆P≥ 1/2 h^'
We can find out the great similarity!
My atom model can also successfully explain Zeeman effect. There is no need of electron spin quantization. Following is my deduction:
For orbital magnetic moment:
Ua=Uo*J (Uo=q/2m, J=nh’) ( h’ is plank constant)
For spin magnetic moment:
Ub=Us*S(Us=q/m, S=Iw) ( r=electron radius, m=electron mass, v=electron spin speed)
J is proximally 10^-34
If r=around 10^-13meter, there will be spin-orbit coupling. (electron spin angular momentum S=Iw=1/2h’(r=h’/2mc,v=c); this explain why electron spin is quantized) Thus, Zeeman effect is observed. It is worth noting that classical electron radius (10^-15meter) is underestimated. Thus, my deduction should be correct.
Quantum mechanics hypothesizes that electron’s phase velocity is not equal to group velocity. However, there is no dispersion phenomenon in atom. Thus, how can we say electron wave’s phase velocity is different from electron wave’s group velocity. Actually, I think electron’s group velocity is exactly the same as electron’s phase velocity. If we accept the fact that electron group velocity is phase velocity, then Schrodinger and Dirac equation has severe defects. The principle assumption of Schrodinger and Dirac equation is that electron wave energy can be described by Plank law:
E=hf (f=electron wave frequency)
According to DeBroglie’s hypothesis, the matter wave wavelength is:
According to Einstein’s special relativity, the total energy of a moving mass is:
We can see the discrepancy of these two equations. Electron moving speed is not equal to lightspeed c. Electron wave energy cannot be described by E=hf. Thus, Schrodinger and Dirac equations underestimate electron’s total energy. The basic assumption of Schrodinger and Dirac equation is totally wrong. Thus, quantum mechanics is totally wrong!
A new atom model
Reply #5 on:
07/02/2011 03:35:38 »
In addition, it is proved recently that Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics is not equal to Schrodinger’s wave equation. Thus, there is inconsistency between Heisenberg’s formula and Schrodinger’s formula. This is a major defect in quantum mechanics. And, an important phenomenon called Bremssttrahlung suggested that electron can emit continuous electromagnetic radiation with continuous emission spectrum. It is directly against Schrodinger’s and Dirac’s equation saying that electron only has discrete energy. In Schrodinger’s equation, the symbol Ψ2 is defined as probability or wave amplitude. However, Ψ is actually used in Schrodinger’s equation and it is a complex number. Ψ is not Ψ2. How can a complex number describe probability wave amplitude in Schrodinger’s equation? Quantum mechanics is wrong!
Heisenberg’s principle of uncertainty said that we cannot predict the exact electron position in the atom because photo will interfere with electron’s orbit. Then, Dr. Schrodinger proposed his atom model by using wave probability function. However, the probability has severe limitation. It causes a paradox like Schrodinger’s cat that saying the strangeness and logical problems of the quantum mechanics. And, it is very difficult to imagine electrons can really rotate in strange orbital shapes such as dumbbell or double donut from Schrodinger’s atom model. It is more reasonable that electrons are rotating in a circular or ellipse shape. Quantum mechanics needs Copenhagen interpretation saying that wave function collapse during observation. It says that subject’s measurement affects object’s physical law and fact (positivism). It is not realism and is not truth. Because the wave function collapse Copenhagen interpretation cannot be accepted by most scientists, there are other quantum mechanics interpretations such as Consistent histories, Many worlds, Ensemble interpretation, Decoherence, Conciousness causes collapse, Objective collapse theory, Many minds, Quantum logic, Bohm interpretation, Incomplete measurement, and Relational quantum mechanics. These theories attack each other and none of them is generally accepted in scientific world. I think none of them including Copenhagen interpretation is correct. In addition, quantum mechanics requires to assume absolute and discontinuous time which should be discarded according to special relativity. Quantum mechanics treats space and time separately and differently (differentiate once or twice), not treating space-time as a four dimension structure. Quantum mechanics also allows to disobey conservation of energy which is the most fundamental law of physic. This new atom model proposed here let the atom go back to the classical physics. Principle of uncertainty is a limitation of observational physics, but it cannot be viewed as a law to governing real atom orbit. I believe this new atom model will provide an important insight into the current physics.
There was an error while thanking