The atom, its quantum device.

Modern science has partially figured out the structure of atoms. At least he knows that an atom is made up of protons, neutrons and electrons. Science has measured the parameters of these particles: mass, charge, magnetic parameters, dimensions. It didn't go further than that.

We do not know much about the structure of these particles and therefore we cannot more or less acceptably understand the interaction of these particles. How do they stick together? What forces are involved in this process? What and how do they change and does it change at all?

I looked for models of atoms on the Internet, and there were not too many of them. More precisely, two, and even then one of them is some improvement on the other.

The classical model of the atom was proposed by Rutherford and Bohr. Here's what Wikipedia says about this:

“Planetary model of the Bohr-Rutherford atom. In 1911, Ernest Rutherford, after doing a series of experiments, came to the conclusion that the atom is a semblance of a planetary system in which electrons move in orbits around the heavy positively charged nucleus located in the center of the atom (“Rutherford's model of the atom”). However, such a description of the atom came into conflict with classical electrodynamics. The fact is that, according to classical electrodynamics, an electron moving with centripetal acceleration must emit electromagnetic waves and, consequently, lose energy. Calculations showed that the time it takes for an electron in such an atom to fall to the nucleus is absolutely negligible. To explain the stability of atoms, Niels Bohr had to introduce postulates, which boiled down to the fact that an electron in an atom, being in some special energy states, does not emit energy ("the Bohr-Rutherford atom model"). Bohr's postulates showed that classical mechanics is not applicable to the description of the atom. Further study of the radiation of the atom led to the creation of quantum mechanics, which made it possible to explain the vast majority of the observed facts. ”

The postulates introduced by Bohr could not be described by the laws of classical mechanics. The electron revolves around the nucleus with acceleration and therefore must emit electromagnetic energy. The loss of energy brings the electron into an unstable state. It is necessary to make sure that the electron does not emit energy, for example, like a satellite, then it will rotate around the nucleus without falling on the nucleus. Bohr thought and decided to assign the following quality to electrons: if an electron is in such and such an energetic state, then it does not emit anything. Classical science did not understand this discrimination of energy states. Quantum mechanics came to the rescue and appeared:

“Quantum mechanical model of the atom. The modern atomic model is an evolution of the planetary model. According to this model, the nucleus of an atom consists of positively charged protons and chargeless neutrons and is surrounded by negatively charged electrons. However, the concepts of quantum mechanics do not allow us to assume that electrons move around the nucleus along any definite trajectories (the uncertainty of the coordinates of an electron in an atom can be comparable to the dimensions of the atom itself). ”

Now everything has become clear. Since we do not know how the electron moves, and whether it is an electron in the classical concept, anything can happen there. In quantum mechanics, an electron is represented as a wave function, the modulus, which can be located there with such and such a probability.

It turns out that the modern model has not brought any clarity to the structure of the atom. But after all, an electron in the form of a particle (condensed wave), or in the form of a wave still somehow moves around the nucleus, and this is a stable and main working state. And whether we can measure the coordinates of a particle or a wave is our problem. Nature knows where everything is.

I agree with Ernest Rutherford, but have objections to Niels Bohr's postulates.

How is an electron kept in the orbit of an atom?

Let an electron move along the line AC with the speed V (Fig. 1). At the point B , it falls into the zone of action of the proton. What does it mean, it gets into the range of a proton? This is when the mutual attraction of the particles gives the electron an acceleration, at which it emits a photon. It doesn't matter what kind of energy he has.

Under the influence of this attraction, the electron will be at the point B . Naturally, the electron does not move along a straight BV , but along some other trajectory. But this is not important, the main thing is that the acceleration led to the emission of a photon.

The loss of a part of the negative charge by the electron reduced the electric force of attraction of the electron Fээ and partial compensation of the positive charge of the proton with this piece of negative charge leads to a decrease in the electric forces of attraction of the proton F ep .

The electron is affected by the magnetic field of the proton Fm and the electron begins to move away from the proton along the SH line. The electron acquires negative acceleration, that is, it decelerates along the radius of the proton. But the speed along the line AC remained the same. While moving along the BV line, the electron generated a photon, and while moving along the SH line, it will absorb the photon emitted by the electron and reflected from the proton.

Due to this inelastic absorption of a photon at the point Г , the absolute speed of the electron will be the same as it was at the point B . The cycle can be repeated as many times as you like. Energy does not go anywhere and does not come from anywhere. It's just that energy from one type is transferred to another and back.

From this moment on, a full-fledged atom begins. The exchange process begins exactly the same as between protons and neutrons in a nucleus or between a satellite and the Earth.

In what orbit (at what level) the electron will move depends on its speed and on its mass.

At the speed V the electron will move in the orbit а . If the speed of the electron was higher than the speed V , then it will move in the orbit с, otherwise in the orbit b.

What happens when an electron falls directly onto a proton? What do we know for certain in this phenomenon and what can we assume with a high degree of probability? We know for sure that there are no mergers of a proton and an electron, that is, protons and electrons do not destroy each other partially or completely, much like meteorites falling to Earth. The meteorite is destroyed, turning into part of the Earth.

We know that an electron that has fallen into the zone of action of a proton will tend to fall on the proton under the influence of the forces of attraction of negative and positive fields. According to science, the magnetic field strength near the geometric center of the electron turns out to be 7.017 * 10 8 T, and for a proton this strength is 8.476 * 10 14 Tl These are great tensions, and they quickly decrease from the centers of the particles.

We know for sure that an electron that gets into a magnetic field changes its trajectory. This manifests itself in cathode ray tubes, electric motors, accelerators. Our Earth from the bombardment of particles flying from space is protected by a magnetic field, which is observed in the northern lights. Scattering of electrons by protons can be observed.

Based on this, it can be assumed that an electron flying to a proton under the action of attractive forces will not be pushed away from the proton into space, but will change its direction and fly tangentially to the proton. How close it gets to the proton depends on the speed of the electron. We will return to the situation depicted in Figure 1.

What happens if an electron moving in orbit a absorbs a certain photon (Fig. 2)?

Suppose that an electron of a certain mass, moving along the line AB , at the point B falls into the zone of action of a proton. The interaction between the particles should make the electron move along the trajectory BVG . If by this time it absorbs a photon or the sum of photons, and this will happen if the electron slows down and its speed decreases, then its trajectory will change. And here's the reason.

A portion of energy has been added to the electron. As a result, the mass and, accordingly, the charge of the electron increased. But the magnitude of the charge grows faster than the magnitude of the mass. Because of these changes, the force of attraction between the proton and the electron has partially increased, but due to the predominant increase in charge, the magnetic force Fm will unfold the electron earlier, and now the electron will move along the path БВ1Г1

This is a dynamically stable state. The electron cannot fly into space due to the Coulomb forces, and the magnetic forces of the proton do not allow it to fall on the proton. The more energy a photon is generated by an electron to bond, the stronger the bond between the electron and the proton. This leads to different strengths of the covalent bond between atoms.

The higher the speed of the electron, the less its charge, the weaker the magnetic field of the proton affects it and the closer the electron flies to the nucleus. It is the physical nature of the reduction in body size as the body speed increases.

Is this oscillatory motion of an electron around the nucleus a Louis de Broglie wave? Maybe yes. According to Louis de Broglie, a moving particle has a wavelength.

From Fig. 2 we see that the electron, which decreased its speed, but increased its mass, turned out to be on the trajectory b farther from the nucleus. The increase in mass and the trajectory BV1Г1 show that the wavelength has decreased. The energy of a connected photon also speaks about this. The lower the speed of the electron, the shorter the photons can be generated.

But on the other hand, the formula shows that a decrease in speed leads to an increase in the wavelength. And what will overpower what is not clear. If the electron moved into the orbit b along the trajectory с , then the coincidence with the Louis de Broglie formula would be complete, but would contradict our model.

Naturally, this is only a hypothesis. The author, unfortunately, cannot confirm this (he simply cannot) at least by mathematical calculations. And the problem seems to be simple: there are the values of the intensities of the electrical and magnetic components, the sizes of bodies, masses, and more. Maybe someone at their leisure will figure this out and either overturn or confirm the truth of this model.

And now, it would seem, everything is simple - the electron flies up to the proton and the atom is ready. But it doesn't work. We have enough protons and electrons, but we cannot synthesize such a seductive gold atom. What's the matter?

Consider Figure 3.

Green arrows 1, 2, 3, 4 are the trajectory of an electron, and red arrows 5, 6, 7 are the trajectories of the exchange photon. As you can see, the exchange photon should hit the electron all the time. If the exchange photon does not hit the electron, then the latter will simply fly away from the proton, which happens when electrons are scattered by protons. And the exchange photon itself will go into space.

Since the electron seems to be huge for a photon, such a hit can occur several times and only then the system will collapse. This is described in the articles "Spontaneous emission.”, “Stimulated emission.” and "Laser and maser."

If all parameters match, as in Figure 4,

the electron can circle around the nucleus for as long as it wants.

In the proposed model, the electron, and all other elements of the atom, behave in a deterministic manner. There is no probability, everything repeats itself cyclically - just measure. But we love to count, although not what we need. It's more convenient.

For those who do not like the proposed hypothesis, I can offer a hypothesis about the structure of the atom set forth by Richard Feynman.

And finally, a little philosophy. Whatever the model of the atom is: probabilistic, as it is now accepted to be considered world science, or deterministic, as I assume, or some other model, the problem of atomic synthesis still arises. There are a lot of atoms in nature. They alone cannot reproduce like DNA. Or am I wrong?

Perhaps for atoms in the universe there was some kind of zone like a sub-vital zone, in which a lot of different DNA appeared at once. For the infinite world space, our universe is an infinitely small area where the synthesis of such a huge number of atoms took place.

At first glance, for the synthesis of a large number of atoms, the probabilistic model of the atom is more suitable than the deterministic one. I chose the required nucleus, collected the appropriate number of electrons, threw electrons onto the nucleus, which will attract these electrons to itself, and they will take the required states in this nucleus. Yes, the fact is that there is a Pauli ban. All states must be different. As if the electrons did not quarrel for more comfortable places.

     index       to section  up