Reply To: Some Web Buttons I Made

[Rezwan]

Thanks Arvid! Now we’re getting somewhere.

I don’t know about the public being fixated on the Bohr model. I think this is more the problem that rises with the concepts of “positive”, “negative” and “particles”. I suppose a question behind this is: why isn’t everything a neutron? No one is questioning the observed factness of these things, or the precise measurements and descriptive equations. It’s more of the “why” of things, and a need for a better way to visualize the relationships at work with these things we call protons, electrons, neutrons. The “wave” and “cloud” concepts help a lot.

The “positive” and “negative” concepts make it difficult to understand. We’re told that protons, if they were to obey their electrical charge urges, would fly apart, but a “strong force” can bind them together. It’s natural to think then that if electrons and protons were to obey the electrical urges, they would bind into a neutron, so some force must be keeping them apart. Of course there’s an equation somewhere that shows how much energy is required for a neutron to become an electron and proton and vice versa. But now your cloud concept shows that the electron is right on top of the proton – so that makes it neutron-esque at certain moments.

So the meta question is, “what is charge”?