• lugal@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    The atom model with the electrons going around the nucleus, is inspired by the solar system. The better model doesn’t look anything alike. This is a naturalistic circular fallacy

    • mkwt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      5 months ago

      If atoms were like the solar system, all of the electron orbits would lose energy and decay by emitting electromagnetic radiation.

      The same type of decay does occur in the solar system as the planets emit gravitational radiation, but the decay rate is so miniscule we can’t really detect it.

      • gasgiant@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Electrons do orbit like planets in the solar system however they’re also waves. Which is what gives the set radii they can orbit at and keeps it all stable. The orbits can and do change due to the emission or absorption of certain quanta of radiation.

        So saying like is fine. It’s not an exact description but more of a simile to help understanding. They do orbit like a solar system. Saying electrons orbit the same as a solar system would be incorrect. That’s when the maths doesn’t work and the electrons orbit would decay.

        • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Ok, hear me out for curiosity sake. What happens if you slow down time to magnitudes less then you can observe?

  • lost_tortie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    5 months ago

    Or that the observable universe could be inside of a black hole. Don’t watch too many black hole videos before bed.

    Planet 9 is not a primordial black hole and it can’t hurt you. 🙀

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      IIRC, isn’t it closer to a white hole, what with expansion? If you were far enough away, you cannot reach ‘there’ vs being guaranteed to reach ‘there’ like a black hole. Though really, it’s neither. Just curved spacetime.

      The fact we think of white holes and black holes as separate entities just goes to show our great lack of understanding of spacetime.

    • Slotos@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I mean, Schwarzschild radius shows that for a medium of constant density (and on a large scale, Universe is fairly uniform) there is an upper limit of a radius of a ball comprised of said medium above which it will form an event horizon.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarzschild_radius#Calculating_the_maximum_volume_and_radius_possible_given_a_density_before_a_black_hole_forms

      Which means that an infinite universe of non-zero density is either a bloody paradox (spend a minute deciding where exactly event horizons should form and whether there will be gaps), or our understanding of gravity and spacetime breaks on ginormous scales just as it does on micro ones.

      PS: I have seen no physicists talk about this, so there’s a good chance that there’s a simple resolution to the problem and I’m just stupid.

  • NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Look, I’m not saying our universe exists as a node in an infinite fractal of repeating universes, but one of these is the largest structure we can see and another is the smallest:

  • niktemadur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Now imagine if something… or someone… would poke our galaxy with an observation, and all the stars in the arms instantly collapsed into a single particle.

  • Valen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I had this thought as a kid. But I thought it was neat that we might be part of an atom of some larger molecule. Didn’t keep me awake. I had other trauma keeping me awake, like going to school.

  • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is something I find believable, and I wonder why it’s not commonly discussed more.

    • essell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It is in the right groups. Sort of thing you can find talked about at flat earther meetings all over the globe, UFO enthusiasts if you can get a word in to ask and in Christian science journals.