this post was submitted on 03 May 2024
466 points (90.7% liked)

Science Memes

11004 readers
2509 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
466
sweet dreams (mander.xyz)
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
95 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -3 points 6 months ago (5 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 months ago (3 children)

you have to fail intro to qm 101 and/or be stoned out of your mind to think this way

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

And why is that?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

planetary orbits are not quantized, for starters. atomic orbitals are occupied by pairs (at most) of electrons, and this is because of qm spin exists which has no analogue in large scale. electrons aren't spinning around on an orbit, they're more of a smudged standing wave. it's also a staple among vapid thonkers like mckenna

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Here's a few reasons this doesn't work:

  1. Planets are different sizes, electrons are all identical
  2. 2 planets cannot occupy the same orbit, but (at least) two electrons with opposite spin can
  3. If you have a high speed planet entering the solar system, you can't transfer some of its energy to another planet and have the rogue planet continue with less energy
  4. All orbital energies are possible, not so much for atoms
  5. Planetary orbits emit gravitational waves. If electrons produced the equivalent (bremstrahlung radiation) during "orbit", they would collide with the nucleus hilariously fast. This isn't a problem because electron orbitals don't have a physical representation.
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Thank

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Can confirm the latter makes you consider this

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Can confirm, this is ALL I see on certain substances

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago

it's not commonly discussed because it's wrong

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

You just need to know what happens to the elements on the periodic table that have the highest atomic weights. Here's the article for Lawrencium give that a quick read through and then try to figure out why the universe is almost certainly not a very large atom as we define it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

because it only seems believable if you're using an outdated and simplified model for atoms, and forget about the fact that atoms are also made up of protons/neutrons who are in turn made up of quarks, and the fact that there are a whole bunch of other fundamental particles that don't give a toss about atoms.

If you look at the more accurate electron cloud model it stops making sense to compare it to a solar system.