Kyuu Nye 425 Report post Posted October 12, 2011 Quite right. EDIT: Forget all the models lol. Unless you got some knowledge about calculus and atomic physics, its quite difficult.. But in short: Shell model--> electrons revolve in shells/orbits like our planetary system. Orbital models-->electrons revolve randomly in a given volume of space. And @Nobody!, i dont even know 10% of science! I am just a 1st year student doing chem engg.... Mr:Kyuu there is an exception though. Awesome! I'm an exception! Btw... most people don't know .0000000001% of science (some even less), so don't sell yourself short. And for someone who is only a freshman, you are pretty knowledgeable. It is called Quantum physics, not atomic btw. That is the name for physics at the atomic and subatomic level. That said, I'm not even entirely sure that Quantum physicists know what the hell they are talking about at times. Quantum mechanics is an insane subject and it is deep and expansive, mainly because it can be applied to the entire universe, and not just larger objects like physics. In fact, quantum physics effects regular physics, because when something is discovered or theorized that proves to be true (ie Einstein's theory of relativity) it can effect everything, which is why Einstein's theory is more generally accepted than say Newton's laws. Newton's laws are more generally taught in non-science fields because chances are, if you aren't going into science, you aren't going to need quantum physics to quantify gravitational pull or the velocity of a subatomic particle. Hell, I had to learn it too, and I doubt I'm going to use much of it going into Molecular Biology... As for the models thing... I think the Bohr model has persisted as long as it has is because it is easier to conceptualize and understand without an in depth level of understanding. HOWEVER! You gave misinformation... I assume when he said "2,8,8,8" he was referring to the numbers on the periodic table. If that is so, then that has NOTHING to do with the shell model, but everything to do with the orbital model, because those are the number of electrons in a given orbital. And that is important to know because knowing those dictates how electrons move and how electrons transfer energy between excited and ground states. Yep. And calculus meaning some difficult ones. But anyways you are right about Shell models. And yes..Orbitals..consider your room. You are singing in your room your favourite song, imaging a concert. That means you are moving randomly in your room! Same with electrons. I do not like that analogy...Mainly because the energy dissipates in your room and never moves back to a ground state. To explain it best, you have to understand that electrons don't move completely random, nor in a set path. This is important because electrons tend to like to travel in pairs in their orbitals, but prefer to have at least one electron in each space in that set orbital. The orbitals are s, p, d, f. (there are more, but those 4 cover most of the possibilities) Before the p orbital can be used, there need to be 2 electrons in the s1 orbital, and 2 in the s2 orbital... before d can be used there need to be 2 electrons in the s1 orbital, 2 electrons in the s2 orbital, and 6 electrons in the p1 orbital... And so on. As you continue on it gets a bit more complicated. Now why the room scenario doesn't work... The room scenario doesn't account for excited state... The natural orbital of an electron is considered the ground state. When energy is applied it moves up to a higher orbital position. THAT is the particular reason why the Bohr model has remained relevant, and is continued to be taught is because it easily and effectively shows the transition between ground and excited states. I won't get into it much further because then it starts delving into Quantum Chemistry, which I don't want to do... 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Detective Rohit 38 Report post Posted October 12, 2011 Awesome! I'm an exception! Btw... most people don't know .0000000001% of science (some even less), so don't sell yourself short. And for someone who is only a freshman, you are pretty knowledgeable. It is called Quantum physics, not atomic btw. That is the name for physics at the atomic and subatomic level. That said, I'm not even entirely sure that Quantum physicists know what the hell they are talking about at times. Quantum mechanics is an insane subject and it is deep and expansive, mainly because it can be applied to the entire universe, and not just larger objects like physics. In fact, quantum physics effects regular physics, because when something is discovered or theorized that proves to be true (ie Einstein's theory of relativity) it can effect everything, which is why Einstein's theory is more generally accepted than say Newton's laws. Newton's laws are more generally taught in non-science fields because chances are, if you aren't going into science, you aren't going to need quantum physics to quantify gravitational pull or the velocity of a subatomic particle. Hell, I had to learn it too, and I doubt I'm going to use much of it going into Molecular Biology... As for the models thing... I think the Bohr model has persisted as long as it has is because it is easier to conceptualize and understand without an in depth level of understanding. HOWEVER! You gave misinformation... I assume when he said "2,8,8,8" he was referring to the numbers on the periodic table. If that is so, then that has NOTHING to do with the shell model, but everything to do with the orbital model, because those are the number of electrons in a given orbital. And that is important to know because knowing those dictates how electrons move and how electrons transfer energy between excited and ground states. I do not like that analogy...Mainly because the energy dissipates in your room and never moves back to a ground state. To explain it best, you have to understand that electrons don't move completely random, nor in a set path. This is important because electrons tend to like to travel in pairs in their orbitals, but prefer to have at least one electron in each space in that set orbital. The orbitals are s, p, d, f. (there are more, but those 4 cover most of the possibilities) Before the p orbital can be used, there need to be 2 electrons in the s1 orbital, and 2 in the s2 orbital... before d can be used there need to be 2 electrons in the s1 orbital, 2 electrons in the s2 orbital, and 6 electrons in the p1 orbital... And so on. As you continue on it gets a bit more complicated. Now why the room scenario doesn't work... The room scenario doesn't account for excited state... The natural orbital of an electron is considered the ground state. When energy is applied it moves up to a higher orbital position. THAT is the particular reason why the Bohr model has remained relevant, and is continued to be taught is because it easily and effectively shows the transition between ground and excited states. I won't get into it much further because then it starts delving into Quantum Chemistry, which I don't want to do... :D and thats how it becomes interesting. i saw 110% sure you will say something.. So lets start...10% of science..meaning 10% of science that i have learnt. --> Yes, it is quantum physics and not atomic physics. -->I dont know..but i have heard that Quantum physics is applied for all the sub-atomic particles and general relativity to objects of Big masses. -->What i meant was(maybe my wordings were wrong), that electrons DO NOT travel in orbits..rather they are found in orbitals, whose shapes differ...ie s,p,d,f. As per i know, there was only ONE more orbital after f. You can enlighten me on that. You know electrons would fall into the nucleus in case of bohr's theory..and then the zeeman's effect and all that...2,8,8,2 was what they taught us till 10th grade..ie, 1st had 2, 2nd had 8...etc etc. -->i know all those orbitals and number of electrons in it..believe me..it took me 3 days gasp all of it..and still i do some scattered mistakes.. -->The example i gave was just a simple one for understanding.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kyuu Nye 425 Report post Posted October 12, 2011 :D thats how it gets interesting. So lets start...10% of science..meaning 10% of science that i have learnt. --> Yes, it is quantum physics and not atomic physics. -->I dont know..but i have heard that Quantum physics is applied for all the sub-atomic particles and general relativity to objects of Big masses. -->What i meant was(maybe my wordings were wrong), that electrons DO NOT travel in orbits..rather they are found in orbitals, whose shapes differ...ie s,p,d,f. As per i know, there was only ONE more orbital after f. You can enlighten me on that. You know electrons would fall into the nucleus in case of bohr's theory..and then the zeeman's effect and all that...2,8,8,2 was what they taught us till 10th grade..ie, 1st had 2, 2nd had 8...etc etc. -->i know all those orbitals and number of electrons in it..believe me..it took me 3 days gasp all of it..and still i do some scattered mistakes.. -->The example i gave was just a simple one for understanding.. Electrons follow certain patterns, that isn't completely random, but if you are looking at a space filling of electron activity it will seem that way. They aren't round like the Bohr model but they are still there. If you want to see how electrons move and their range of motion you need to look at the various orbital models. They still move in certain patterns and are far from random. I remember reading about a theory that involved a completely random electron movement model, but it doesn't account for energy transference, so it will never be adopted unless someone figures out how that would work. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Detective Rohit 38 Report post Posted October 12, 2011 Electrons follow certain patterns, that isn't completely random, but if you are looking at a space filling of electron activity it will seem that way. They aren't round like the Bohr model but they are still there. If you want to see how electrons move and their range of motion you need to look at the various orbital models. They still move in certain patterns and are far from random. I remember reading about a theory that involved a completely random electron movement model, but it doesn't account for energy transference, so it will never be adopted unless someone figures out how that would work. Maybe... Electrons being random in a specific orbital was i guess Heisenbergs's uncertinity principle. I havent come across anything after it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kyuu Nye 425 Report post Posted October 12, 2011 Maybe... Electrons being random in a specific orbital was i guess Heisenbergs's uncertinity principle. I havent come across anything after it. http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/py106/PeriodicTable.html explains the connection between the three well. Bohr, orbital and uncertainty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wildheart888 170 Report post Posted October 12, 2011 Holy. I know nothing of what you guys are talking about. xP xP xP Anywhoo, I am currenltly learning about Chemistry in Science class. xD Like the Periodic Table, atoms, electons, neutrons, atomic mass, atomic number, protons, ions, isotopes, atom shells, the number of electrons on the shells, all that. xP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IdentityUnknown 216 Report post Posted October 12, 2011 Well, I can tell you A LOT of amazing things about science 1. If you love astronomy, you can describe your location with precision and detail. I for one, live in the Blue Planet, counted among the inner planets, in the Orion Arm of the Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, etc..., Universe 2. If you love taxonomy, you can classify every living thing into its own K-P-C-O-F-G-S... I add another category exclusive for human beings-- Variety: Normal, Abnormal, Insane, Psycho, Schizo, Paranoid, etc... 3. Biology is the study of life. Study it and you'll find what kind of people you meet everday-- snakes, crabs, sloths, leeches, and the like. 4. If you love physics, you can explain why you always seem to lose things. Apparently, anti-matter is a powerful force. And once again, black holes do exist. We call them "blind spots." 5. If you love chemistry, you'll be an expert on what makes people fall in love with each other. And admit it, chemistry class is a great time for bonding... 6. If you love geology, you will be well-versed in multiplication tables, periodic tables, and water tables--and wonder why the last one never appears on your exam. 7. If you love meteorology, you should know the best place to get an unlimited supply of different shapes and sizes of cotton candy. 8. If you're a fan of marine biology, you will swear that dolphins are smarter than fifth graders. 9. Newton's first law of motion, or the law of inertia states that things at rest tend to stay at rest, and things in motion tend to remain in motion. It shouldn't be a surprise to your parents that waking you up in the morning is such a chore. On the other hand, they have probably restated the other half as "Kids at play remain that way." 10. Sarcasm is a science. I absolutely love your list. <3 And yes, I 100% agree that dolphins are smarter than fifth graders. It's a fact of life. As for the rest of the topic...you guys are all science freaks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tengaku squared 291 Report post Posted October 12, 2011 As for the rest of the topic...you guys are all science freaks. I, for one, have very little interest in science, though a few things interest me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lia. 45 Report post Posted October 12, 2011 I don't know why this thread reminds me of Edison and Newton. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kyuu Nye 425 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 I absolutely love your list. <3 And yes, I 100% agree that dolphins are smarter than fifth graders. It's a fact of life. As for the rest of the topic...you guys are all science freaks. I think most would prefer to be called "Science enthusiasts," or the more lighthearted of the lot might like to be called "science nerds." Personally I prefer to simply be called a "scientist" (after all I will be graduating this year with a degree in Molecular Biology). I also personally think that "freak" is a mite bit harsh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AJ M. 204 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 I think most would prefer to be called "Science enthusiasts," or the more lighthearted of the lot might like to be called "science nerds." Personally I prefer to simply be called a "scientist" (after all I will be graduating this year with a degree in Molecular Biology). I also personally think that "freak" is a mite bit harsh. You being called "science freak" by IdentityUnknown is like Shinichi being called "deduction freak" by Ran. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IdentityUnknown 216 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 I think most would prefer to be called "Science enthusiasts," or the more lighthearted of the lot might like to be called "science nerds." Personally I prefer to simply be called a "scientist" (after all I will be graduating this year with a degree in Molecular Biology). I also personally think that "freak" is a mite bit harsh. Sorry, didn't mean it that way. I'll call you a scientist and I'll call Rohit a science enthusiast instead. You being called "science freak" by IdentityUnknown is like Shinichi being called "deduction freak" by Ran. Well I'm sorry. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patronus Charm 53 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 XD SCIENCE FTW !I remember in elementary school they always let us watch this :)He's awesome~~~ I remember in grade 10 my science teacher would always let us watch this... :V SCIENCE=sleeping time... (for me) PS. I'm not saying that science is boring it's just that my chemistry teacher won't teach us worthier things other than doing the hocky pocky and make fun of us... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kyuu Nye 425 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 Sorry, didn't mean it that way. I'll call you a scientist and I'll call Rohit a science enthusiast instead. Well I'm sorry. I was joking I feel like posting more... But lets just say interesting things always happen... Did you know that they are fighting AIDs with genetic engineering? They cured one person, but his case was very specific. However, this break through may lead to further advancements that might lead to a permanent cure. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wildheart888 170 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 I was joking I feel like posting more... But lets just say interesting things always happen... Did you know that they are fighting AIDs with genetic engineering? They cured one person, but his case was very specific. However, this break through may lead to further advancements that might lead to a permanent cure. xOOOO THEY HAVE A CURE FOR AIDS?!?!?!?! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kyuu Nye 425 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 xOOOO THEY HAVE A CURE FOR AIDS?!?!?!?! No, but they are getting closer... They managed to cure only ONE person using this treatment. However progress like that is incredible. (technically it was HIV, but HIV leads to AIDS). Research like that will continue, and I'd we can see a definitive cure within 10 years. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IdentityUnknown 216 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 I was joking I feel like posting more... But lets just say interesting things always happen... Did you know that they are fighting AIDs with genetic engineering? They cured one person, but his case was very specific. However, this break through may lead to further advancements that might lead to a permanent cure. :V That is cool. No, but they are getting closer... They managed to cure only ONE person using this treatment. However progress like that is incredible. (technically it was HIV, but HIV leads to AIDS). Research like that will continue, and I'd we can see a definitive cure within 10 years. \o/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kyuu Nye 425 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 :V That is cool. \o/ Indeed it is, and apparently it has gone further than from what I last read last year. Look up CCR5 gene therapy. Interesting stuff. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kaitou Kid Legendary Thief 197 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 *looks at kyuu's explanation* When I mentioned 2,8,8, I am refering to the number of electrons in each layer. Hmmmmm... Now I don't get what's the difference between the two... O__O Ah! \o/ yea! I read about the aids thing briefly... (I can't remember where...Maybe on tv...) \o/ that is soooooooo cool!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wildheart888 170 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 *looks at kyuu's explanation* When I mentioned 2,8,8, I am refering to the number of electrons in each layer. Hmmmmm... Now I don't get what's the difference between the two... O__O Ah! \o/ yea! I read about the aids thing briefly... (I can't remember where...Maybe on tv...) \o/ that is soooooooo cool!!! That's exactly what I'M learning in Science too!!! xP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Detective Rohit 38 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 No offence, but finding cure for AIDS has some demerits. But ill take into consideration that it will be a boon for various developing countries. Anything you can update about fight against cancer? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IdentityUnknown 216 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 No offence, but finding cure for AIDS has some demerits. But ill take into consideration that it will be a boon for various developing countries. Anything you can update about fight against cancer? Not that this is in the news yet, but my school counselor knows a parent that may have found a possible cure to it. I don't know any details though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tengaku squared 291 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 Anything you can update about fight against cancer? I'm hearing a lot of stuff, but I can't recall them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Detective Rohit 38 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 WHat i meant to say is some cure via medicines...Not via radiotherepy or removing tumors.. On a side note, i think you guys know Kylie Minogue and Lance Armstrong.dont you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lia. 45 Report post Posted October 13, 2011 From what I've heard... 'In the near future, 1 out of 3 people will have cancer. ' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
