Are atoms perpetual motion machines?
I was watching a cosmology lecture on YouTube. The physicist stated that every proton and electron in existence came into being at the time of the Big Bang. Sagan talked about us being the product of star stuff from the heavier elements coming out of stellar explosions, but the basic components of atoms were always there.
I looked up the question online, but it said they are not because the motion of electrons is not considered "work." It was my understanding that 0° Kelvin is when there is zero atomic motion (whereby the atom itself collapses).
I had thought that is when the universe itself goes totally dark and cold, but could it possibly be that matter itself is eternal? That these little atomic machines can go on literally forever?
0
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
8 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Recently watched another program, that after explaining that a neutron star consists of the densest known material in the universe, went on to described that they've discovered the internal pressures within a proton (it varies depending on distance from the center) that rival that of a neutron star.
Mind truly blown.
WilliamCharles
Level 8
Aug 5, 2019
0
Search on the decay time of neutrons. I did and found that they decay in about fifteen minutes. If that’s true, I doubt the existence of neutron stars.
I would say yes matter is eternal BUT it evolves. Matter condenses to mass and mass is forever changing. Perhaps some atoms slough off like skin cells to the larger picture but when enough mass has been accumulated you have a dark hole which then hosts such great gravity that once again atoms are changed. The big question is what is a Quark’s play in this. We know atoms do lose energy otherwise we would have perpetual motion machines. But the atom is just the host for many other pieces and parts
LMORION
Level 4
Aug 5, 2019
1
My understanding is that electrons inside an atom need to be treated very differently than, say, planets orbiting a star. They behave like both particles and waves. In an atom they form "standing waves" so they are like a "wave" on a jump rope - with one big oscillation in the middle that stays in the middle - not going anywhere. So the electron is not, in a sense, actually moving and is not in perpetual motion. The electron is a wave that does not move (as long as the atom does not interact with anything else). But all atoms attract each other via gravity and one idea is that eventually all matter (atoms) may form into black holes! But black holes are not themselves eternal - they "evaporate" via "Hawking" radiation (one of Stephen Hawking's main contributions). So atoms may not be eternal - if you take the really long term (like 10^150 years or 1 with 150 zeros after it!).
BrianFinn
Level 5
Aug 1, 2019
1
Okay I am way past what I remember from the 11th grade but one of my daughters is at the Large Hadron Collider. I am going to see if I can get her involved but if I do beware. The most simple question turns into the building blocks of the universe. I think they deal in muons and quarks but again let me see if I can get her to visit
@BrianFinn could you surmise this thread into no more than 3 questions you want serious answers to from a Particle Physicist (also an Astrophysicist lol) I will post them to Liz and copy the answers here. I may be able to get her to join but for now she is our Bill Nye the Science Guy but in Hadron speak lol
WilliamCharles
Level 8
July 29, 2019
0
Physics Girl makes excellent videos - see also MinutePhysics which does more on modern topics like atomic physics, quantum mechanics and cosmology.
This was the first one I ever saw and I really enjoyed it. She's quite good at tackling difficult concepts.
Thx for the MinutePhysics rec.
Excellent question. I’ll look for the responses eagerly.
Geoffrey51
Level 8
July 27, 2019
1
Motion of electrons is a misnomer, they really aren't some tiny discrete objects circling a center of force. We can ignore that though because even if it were true it wouldn't matter. Planets are discrete objects circling a center of force. A body in motion stays in motion, you only change the amount of energy in the system when you add or subtract energy.
Buttercup
Level 8
July 27, 2019
2
But orbiting bodies also turn inward or outward over time depending on the nature the forces applied. The clock winds down.
Are atoms immune these forces? Even with the "static" conception of the electron shell, at a magnified level it would have to be some sort of vibration, like that within crystaline structures. Basically that shit is just locked up tight daring the cosmos to do something about it. It declares it can wait forever for you to try.
An astrophysicist's chasing dragons.
@WilliamCharles Entropy will prevail but everything won't stop, heat death isn't absolute zero it's the point where the frictional forces that speed up or slowdown have reached equilibrium. In classical physics if there were planets orbiting dead stars and had swept up all the debris they would just continue forever. Electron orbitals are not accounted for in classical physics but conservation laws still apply. I don't know what heat death looks like in quantum physics but it's not absolute zero. Matter and energy don't disappear.
Electron orbitals would be stable I think and they would correspond to the average amount of energy. In classical physics there would be an average temperature everywhere and so no gradient for energy to flow from state to another so nothing could change.
This seemed to have some useful comments.
WilliamCharles
Level 8
July 27, 2019
0
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.