If unlike charges attract, why doesn't the electron fly into the proton and collide?

It's called electron capture. Only happens if there's enough energy and there usually isn't.

Retard alert

I was never briefed on retard alert procedure, what should I do? Get under my desk?

kek

semi-classical answer or quantum mechanical answer?

Fuck me this board is disrespectful! user asked a pretty good question there and everyone acted like they were retarded? Whats happened Veeky Forums you used to be cool

Shut up OP you are a massive faggot.

These are pretty decent responses

Here is a better question: why doesn't the electron emit photons as it falls closer and closer to the proton? Classically, falling closer to the proton transfers some of the electron's potential energy into kinetic energy (which would move the electron towards the proton, then past, then away, to build up the potential energy again), but, quantum mechanically, the electron should emit photons as its potential energy falls.

i too am taking my first semester of physical chemistry

strong nuclear force...?

quantum mechanically the electron isn't falling. the position of the electron follows a probability distribution. it isn't exactly orbiting the nucleus ( which is also why it doesn't radiate its energy away and fall in the first place)

>It isn't exactly orbiting the nucleus (which is also why it doesn't radiate its energy away and fall in the first place)
This doesn't address why the electron emits a photon as it falls from a more distant orbital, to an orbital nearer to the proton, yet does not emit a photon when the electron appears in any arbitrary point around the proton that is closer than the previous point. What concepts from quantum physics show that there are no orbitals below the lowest energy level (hint: the quantized energy only partially answers this).

physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae688.cfm

Physics fags literally can't agree on an answer

kek

we had this thread already

Think about the electron orbiting the nucleus except without gravity.

Is that a bit of a red herring? Before being observed the electron has no definitive position, nor any definite energy. However upon observation it ends up in a Stationary State, ie a state of constant energy.

Isn't the magnetic field of some atoms produced by their orbiting electrons?

No

The below images are from Maitreya Buddha and Messiah's Online Teachings.

Evolution Stage of Five Basic Elements :
brahmanedu.org/english/materials/images/42_2_179_1.jpg

O-haeng(오행, 五行, Five Elements) with direction and color :
brahmanedu.org/english/materials/images/44_2.jpg

Caitasika :
brahmanedu.org/english/materials/images/11_1_2.jpg
I leave this information for expansion of your thought.

If masses attract, why doesn't the Moon fly into the Earth and collide?

Science on suicide watch.

>people think the electron is in an orbit around the nucleus
are we in the 50s again or is Veeky Forums just retarded?

The moon can't fly retard

When I started learning QM, one thing always bothered me. How Newtons second law is connected with the quantum world? Well it turns out it really doesn't. Newton's second law is a statistical consequence of QM in macroscale. Interactions works completely differently than we first learn for a couple of years. We can summarize interaction as something that changes probability distribution. In fact, there is always a possibility that nothing will happen even if something should interact.

>50s
You had your only chance to sound convincing you knew what you were talking about. The model is far older than that.

It's a special case in the universal code. I solved it by specifically setting the attraction factor to 0.

that really would make it much better to believe in it, brainlet.
Also if you dont know how the 50s are related to this, you should shut your whore mouth

customaudioproductions.com/Electric_Universe_4

Christ it's like I'm back in the mid 90's.

>All that text
>Not a single equation.

Last I heard the moon will slowly drift away from us as the planet becomes tidal locked, then at some point it starts drifting back before getting too close and getting ripped apart and the debris blanketing the earth. Has that story changed?

Conservation of energy

>posts Bohr model
I'm triggered. Even Bohr said that model was wrong when he presented it.

Although it's been answered already by several people I'll bite the bait anyway. The reason that the electron (which is zooming around an orbital known as the "electron cloud" generally doesn't collide with the nucleus is because the attractive force from the proton is just enough to keep the electron in the orbital, but not enough to adjust the trajectory to actually hit it. There is a chance, but it's not likely.

An easy way to look at it in the s orbital is to think of it like you have a farm, and there is a rabbit running around in the field. The rabbit is running seemingly randomly, and at the center of your field there is its burrow. The rabbit will run around the field at its whim, but it won't fully leave the field, because its burrow is there. You're basically asking if that rabbit is running around randomly, what are the odds that it will accidentally (key word there) go into its burrow and fall asleep.

but surely at some point the rabbit would want to go to sleep and deliberately go to the whole to sleep

It was a poor metaphor to begin with, what makes you think extending it is going to mean anything at all?

This rabbit doesn't sleep

I'm pretty sure if you do the calculation the moon will fully escape before it ever becomes tidally locked. Either that or the sun will have destroyed the earth moon system by then. It will never return.

Than why does he need the burrow?

it already is tidally locked

It was something about the solar wind pushing it back towards us at some point.

The moon is, not the earth.

you're right, I don't know what I was even saying. The actual reason the moon is moving away from the earth is because the waves on earth caused by the moon are creating a drag force. This friction has to get it's energy from somewhere, and it's coming out of the potential energy of the earth moon system.
>It was something about the solar wind pushing it back towards us at some point.
The solar wind is pushing the moon away from us half the time and toward us half the time. it cancels out overall.

>The moon is
yeah, exactly

delta(x)delta(t)>=hbar/2.

More specifically, pr=n(hbar).

dude angular momentum, lmao

>electron capture
This shit still confused me.

I remember reading years ago that electrons couldn't get too close to the nucleus because the closer they got the more precise their position could be determined, so in turn its momentum would become more and more uncertain, to the point they would go BACK to its original position due to quantum tunneling (or something like that, I don't remember exactly).

If that's the case then how does an unstable nucleus manage to overcome all that kinetic energy and actually capture an electron?

The same quantum tunneling that can make the electron return to its base level can also make it go straight to the nucleus

Long after the earth becomes tidally locked to the moon the earth will become tidally locked to the sun and rotate more slowly than the moons orbit, the resulting tides then cause the moon to start pulling towards the earth slowly until it hits the earth-moon roche limit and is torn apart.

>reddit science thread actually talks about science, shitposters are banned
>Veeky Forums science thread full of trolls and people calling each other brainlets
>mods keep the thread up
Welp i'm done.

I'm curious about whether we can model a three body system with all three bodies tidally locked. I trust your explanation but I would like just a little more to convince me.

then please go back to your circlejerk hell and upvote the opinion you already agree with while trying to censor everything that hurts your feelings

I looked it up myself, found a fairly thorough description but I'm not sure where to find a mathematical explanation for what it asserts.

Feelings have nothing to do with science. Neither does shitposting. This board is 100% shitposting all the time.

Which subreddit?

I tried /r/science and it's pop-sci bullshit

link?

Mods are not omnipotent, you need to actually report shitposters if you want anything done about them.

davidreneke.com/the-fate-of-our-moon/