Electron configurations, Grotrian Diagrams, and Term Symbols

The Chromosphere & Second Solar Spectrum: Monitoring the Chemical Playground of the Sun!
• The Chromosphere & Sec...
Astrophysics Papers vs Einstein Coefficients: Chemical Coordination & The Second Solar Spectrum!
• Astrophysics Papers vs...
Beryllium - Hide and Seek in the Sun!
• Beryllium - Hide and S...
Relative Solar Abundances of the Elements: A 100 year perspective!
• Relative Solar Abundan...
Two Electron Transitions in the Chromosphere!
• Two Electron Transitio...
The MOST IMPORTANT Tool in Astronomy - Analysis of Spectroscopic Lines!
• The MOST IMPORTANT Too...
Spectroscopic Lines in the Solar Atmosphere
• Spectroscopic Lines in...
Group IIA Elements: Chromospheric Partial Redistribution vs the Standard Solar Model! • Group IIA Elements: Ch...
G. Herzberg, Atomic Spectra and Atomic Structure, Dover Publications, New York, 1944.
J. Tennyson, Astronomical Spectroscopy: An Introduction to the Atomic and Molecular Physics of Astronomical Spectra, 2nd Ed, World Scientific, New Jersey, 2011.
S.N. Thakur and D.K. Rai, Atom, Laser and Spectroscopy, 2nd Edition, PHI Learning, New Delhi, 2013.
W. Curdt, et al. The SUMER spectral atlas of solar disk features,Astron. Astrophys. 2001, 375, 591-613.
www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf...
NIST lines data
physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/ASD/...
Solar Fraunhofer Spectrum with assignments
bass2000.obspm.fr/download/so...
Solar abundance data
arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/19...
Digital Fraunhofer Spectrum
bass2000.obspm.fr/solar_spect...
Thank you for viewing this video on Sky Scholar! This channel is dedicated to new ideas about the nature of the sun, the stars, thermodynamics, and the microwave background. We will discuss all things astronomy, physics, chemistry, and imaging related! We hope that the combination of facts and special effects will aid in learning even the toughest concepts in astronomy. If you enjoyed this video, please subscribe.
Pierre-Marie Robitaille, Ph.D., was a professor of Radiology at The Ohio State University from 1989-2019, and also held an appointment in the Chemical Physics Program. In 1998, he led the design and assembly of the world’s first Ultra High Field MRI System. Readings from this equipment brought into question fundamental aspects of modern thermal physics, such as Kirchhoff’s Law of thermal emission.
Outro Music:
Foria: Break Away
/ foria
• Foria - Break Away | M...

[@johncampbell9216]

OK, at 8am in the morning, this was way too much for my brain to absorb but I think I got the direction. Let me get three cups of coffee and a banana in my stomach and I’ll go over it another four times until I get it! 😂

[@MrSkypelessons]

Fantastic, Pierre, this takes me back to my youth. I have always adored atomic structure, and you teach it brilliantly.

[@amommamust]

I was always a word nerd, the science did not come naturally to me. I still love watching him because he is just such a charming human, even if I only get about half of what he is trying to show me!

[@DeathValleyDazed]

@@amommamust Agree and one having the Robitaille family as neighbors would be lucky.

[@MrSkypelessons]

@@amommamust A lot of this video (the s,p,d,f orbitals) is module 101, atomic structure, at all chemistry faculties in all universities. All undergraduates study it, and it's not as hard as you might think. The maths behind atomic structure is hard (Shrodinger's wave equation - he talks about the three quantum numbers (n ,l ,m) in this video), but the general idea is still easy to model in your head, and Pierre brings it all back - I even remember learning at A level (that's before uni in the UK - 17) that the 4s orbital is filled (somewhat surprisingly!) before the 3d orbital. If you want to learn more, there are some great online courses (and websites) out there that deal with this topic.

[@VariantAEC]

The only thing I could take away from this for now is how electron shell configurations work. I'm glad you covered it because I did not learn about it in school.

[@xkguy]

It seems my high school and college chemistry was a tad simplified (maybe I was put in remedial chemistry?) or maybe things have been learned since the 60s?

[@multi_misa72]

5 grade chemistry my teacher tryed to explane some of this, later other people did try too, it all whent over my head, now i have some idea about it. Thanks doc. Allways a great pleasure to see you.

[@paulb4985]

So much for KISS 🙂 College level but love it. Thanks.

[@justsayin3553]

Voltage potential exists outside the box, like philosophy. My whole day is spinning now. ✨ 👾

[@j2kerrigan]

This will always be my favorite channel on YT.

[@mikemacdonald2094]

Thank you. That was very educational.

[@Devast8r34]

Thank you Dr. Robitaille

[@paulwolf3302]

I wonder why the structure of the nucleus hasn't really been studied. The protons and neutrons should also be located in places described by probability density functions. I guess its because the nucleus isn't involved in chemical reactions and isn't as important to study. But it has to have a structure as well.

[@garymills6702]

Neutrons and protons do have probability positions but because they are 2,000 times more massive than an electron it means the wavelength associated with their mass is much smaller compared to an electron's hence their most probable positions are fixed into a much smaller volume which is basically the size of a nucleus.

[@nicosmind3]

I thought they have studied them, and maybe still do. Aren't they made up of quarks, muons etc?

[@giacomostefanoni7634]

Look up the "Structured Atom Model" or SAM by Edwin Kaal, I'm sure you'll love it ;)

[@lmwlmw4468]

Awesome class ... it took me to my 16's...!!!

[@hawkspiritweaver6664]

Nice Tie!!

[@richardtofield5210]

PMR, can you do a show on magnetism theory .maybe this is what you were gearing up for..when i was at school it was hinted that magnetic elements will have multiple partly filled outer shells and the imbalanced electron activity expresses itself as the magnetic field...can you have different shape magnetic fields? we are used to seeing the hourglass shape in iron filings, but is the field a different shape for heavier elements like europium?

[@bumbleWeaver]

the bigger the proton conglomerate internally, the more circular the magnetic field shape becomes. in my head i see the Iron outer electron field similar to the back paddle wheel of an old style flat bottom paddle steamer, with a paddle gap just big enough for an extra electron to fit briefly before being shot back out again...

[@markhuebner7580]

Beautiful! Now the frequencies and energies of solar photons start telling us about the atoms & molecules(?) they come from. Is it enough? The photon has energy & polarization, will those be enough clues to get the atom/molecule excited/de-excited states?

[@alpineflauge909]

awesome sauce

[@kimberleebrackley2793]

Always a pleasure Dr.Robitaille, l admire your dedication. Be well sir

[@jimrowland6089]

I have been thinking about how this works a lot lately. There must be something special about how this works. What happens if we use H2O in the math? If the field collapses will it rotate 90 degrees? I know this is not pertaining to the sun but I think the math works for both?

[@shiftyparadigm7049]

In organic chemistry I was usually dealing with hybridised orbitals.

[@davidmcguinness9187]

Thanks

[@manipulativer]

But helium 0+0=0 is still paramgnetic. Anyone care to explain?

[@JoeDeglman]

There is a good book that explains this via the structure of the nucleus. The SAM model. By J.E. Kaal 'The Nature of the atom.' The helium nucleus is a crystalline geometric dense pack of protons and electrons that creates a structure that generally neutrally distributes the coulomb forces of the nucleus and that determines the electron shell configuration. Essentially the electron configuration and whether the outer electrons are eclectically neutral is dictated by the orientation of the electrons embedded within the nucleus. There is also a book by Norman D. Cook 'Models of the Atomic Nucleus' that takes at stab at this with a cubic-faced lattice structure of the nucleus. Paramagnetic is about the structure of the nucleus more than it being about the electron shell configuration. The outer electron configuration is secondary to the nuclear configuration of the protons and inner electrons. The distribution of inner electrons WRT to the outer shell electrons is what neutralized the coulomb forces of the entire atom vs whether the entire atom has a magnetic dipole.

[@DeathValleyDazed]

@@JoeDeglman My simple mind creates this question: The crystalline nucleus you describe is related to the metallic crystalline lattice of the Solar surface that Dr. Robitaille mentions in many of his videos? In other words does the nuclei structure scale way macro to the Solar surface level? If by some fluke I’m correct is some experiment possible to prove this point? Disclaimer: I’m way over my head with this topic.

[@bumbleWeaver]

Is the S orbital equal to zero because it is considered a "perfectly balanced" system internally?

[@MrApplewine]

Seems like just circular / spherical harmonics of ether vibration. Hard light from very high frequency ether vibration above gamma. "Orbitals" sound wrong because it sounds like planets orbiting or something, which has nothing to do with fields or harmonics.

[@garymills6702]

What I've never been able to understand is that, chemically speaking, the outer valence electrons, of ALL atoms, are always either s or p orbitals. I realise that this can give the octet of electrons that are stable chemically. If you go strictly through the quantum numbers and sub-shells sometimes the last electron added should go into a d or f orbital but instead goes into an s or p. This means an inner orbital can have more potential energy than an outer orbital when the rule is that as an electron gets further from the nucleus it gets more potential energy. Or is this the average potential energy of an electron as it's distance from the nucleus varies? Always confused me.

[@tomnoyb8301]

Looking at orbital-shell (probability) diagrams at 3:30, some d-shell diagrams contain probabilities inside s and p-shells. Might not this explain how a d-shell might fill before a p-shell (lower energy)? Of course several rather complicated spherical integrals might be performed to confirm the hypothesis in closed-form? Or maybe there's a software engine that computes such things by now? Maybe ChatGPT can write us a paper on it?

[@drscott1]

👍🏼

[@adampetrowsky1771]

👍

[@pierrettegagnon2627]

The pulls and pushes, that remain predictable, and the VENTURIES ARE STABLE

[@justinfalzon6854]

Chemistryyy babyyyy

[@markhuebner7580]

32 electrons? Aren't there more orbital types?

[@rogerscottcathey]

Well, pretty sure "Professor Dave" has been quiet about these last few videos because . . reasons

[@rogerscottcathey]

@@DrWhom : This is elementary and standard... Nothing exotic or silly about. Just over Dave's head or knows there's nothing to refute. Discussing civilly and debating points is also standard in science. What you and Dave do is neither civil or scientific. It's the lowest order of criticism: pejorative and ad hominem attack

[@rogerscottcathey]

@@DrWhom : Snappy come back, but just stop

[@upsguppy520]

LOL YOU MIGHT AS WELL BE SPEAKING WHALE THAT WAS PAINFUL TO MY EGO I AM COMPLETLY LOST

[@Teri_Ann11]

I feel ya.

[@preppingforprophecy7680]

I learn a little; I am lost alot, but progress is progress

[@pierrettegagnon2627]

Pretty sure there is IVORY AND EBONY CODE TALKING OFF THE ALBERTS EINSTEIN FRANK'N STEINZ BIG LOWBALLSKI, SLOPES AS SKIPPING WORTH

[@paulahoskins9972]

Would be nice to throw in a few layman's terms now and then. Maybe I could stay on track!

[@pierrettegagnon2627]

Update, breaking news, "CENTURIES OLD BELL JUST GOT STOLEN FROM ALBERTA.....", BY THIEVES,,,, LIKE THAT HAD TO BE IN THE HEADLINES

[@objuan63]

My head hurts!

[@nzuckman]

All hail the atomic rainbow (⁠ﾉ⁠◕⁠ヮ⁠◕⁠)⁠ﾉ⁠*⁠.⁠✧🌈

[@timothy8426]

Unidirectional unification of forward maximum momentum velocity, in resistance, is both clockwise and counterclockwise. Positive and negative. Where does the electron come from? Heat is the only force in the universe. Lightning burns through atmospheres as heat released. Electricity is heat loss. Heat is light in resistance in atmospheres. Where does the electron come from? Atoms have shock waves of heat being replaced by forward momentum. Atoms are heat waves of exchanging resistance and thermodynamics. Magnets prove hypothesis. Force of unification of unidirectional flow propulsion forces Atoms to hold together as mass. Magnetic fields of forced cycling circulation patterns holding mass together in equalization to cold resistance. Is the cold the electron? Isn't space a cold stationary field of resistance? That propels thermodynamics into forward momentum, and repulsion the redirected trajectories of maximum momentum velocity, in resistance, to thermodynamics cycling circulation patterns, holding mass together, in equalization to cold resistance? Mass, no matter its weight, falls at the same rate of speed, because of the equalization of resistance to mass is constant. Distance is reduced by entanglement? Density cannot exceed resistance repelling from within it. Heat is outward force of pressure, throughout space. It is the speed limit of space itself and mass is space within. Mass is always equal to resistance. Resistance repels thermal energy outward in mass as forced pressure known as weight. Table of elements proves hypothesis. The greater the mass, the more energy (heat) within. More outward pressure. Unidirectional pressure holding mass together. Magnets lined up lock to each other from force of pressure. Spherical magnetic fields are stronger than lined up Magnets. Area of magnetic fields expansion depends on the area of mass in resistance to equalization. Repulsion to thermal energy. Cold resistance. Perpetual motion. Harmonics harmonization of flow increases magnetic fields.

[@lucycarin]

May I just say thank you for bein so smart….✨🎉

[@justinfalzon6854]

I can do the first part of this video in my sleep

[@DeathValleyDazed]

So did you awaken for the second part of Dr. Robitaille’s video? 🥱

[@justinfalzon6854]

@@DeathValleyDazed honestly, I have my notifications on so whenever I even see he's posted anything I show up 'like and comment' for the ai boost. I haven't even gotten to the second part yet. I was like, "Oh I know this, we'll check back in later and see where he goes with it"

[@DeathValleyDazed]

@@justinfalzon6854 I’m with you on boosting Dr Robitaille KZbin algorithm

[@reivanen]

Here, learn this "law of nature" about how electron orbitals work. Whatever you do, do not look into how they actually don't work like that and there are more exceptions than any one person can memorize, but just ignore it and think you "know" something by memorizing this "law"

[@atheistaetherist2747]

I saw one glaring mistake. There is no such thing as an electron that orbits an atomic nucleus. Here i mean the standard kind of electron -- ie a hard little nut. Atoms are not a kind of solar system -- with orbiting planets (electrons). But, if a model works then it works. So, what is it that is orbiting? -- that is now the question -- it aint the standard electron (a hard little nut).

[@tomnoyb8301]

Agreed. Nor is the electron a probability-distribution-function (PDF). Electron is a wave, most akin to a microwave in a spherical resonator. Analogy isn't identical, but solving Maxwell's wave equation with PDF instead of E&H yields strikingly similar energy "modes" and distributions.

[@atheistaetherist2747]

@@tomnoyb8301 I prefer wave to hard little nut. But actually i like the idea that photons hug & orbit a nucleus -- in a similar way to photons bending when passing the Sun, except an extreme case.

[@tomnoyb8301]

@@atheistaetherist2747 - Place a stick of butter in a microwave-oven (without a rotating platform) and watch the microwave energy drill holes in the butter? Electrons are waves, just like photons are waves and microwaves are waves. Now look at a CB antenna vs a wifi antenna. Antennas are roughly the size of waves. Some waves are big, others small. So difficult to grasp, even most physicists can't believe it, but there are no particles in the entire universe. Everything is a wave. Electrons, protons and yes, even neutrons are all waves. Never particles, always waves.

[@atheistaetherist2747]

@@tomnoyb8301 I go with the photon being the fundamental particle -- & a confined photon or bottled photon (a photon forming a closed loop) makes our elementary particles . And all photons emit emradiation -- which can have a forced wave form (eg radio waves).

[@tomnoyb8301]

@@atheistaetherist2747 - Ahhh, no.

[@thedarkmoon2341]

The electron is not a particle.

[@thedarkmoon2341]

@@ianw5439 In the Old Physics model, yes. The old model is still taught by academia but has been obsolete for decades.

[@thedarkmoon2341]

@@ianw5439 Whos peers?

[@thedarkmoon2341]

@@ianw5439 Academic science does not allow for what would be classed as metaphysical explanations. PD Ouspensky in his book "A new model of the Universe" suggests an alternative model. The book is available as a free pdf file from the Gutenberg site. Ouspensky was a good friend of Einstein and Buckminster Fuller, and it was Fuller who quoted " “Everything you've learned in school as “obvious” becomes less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe. For example, there are no solids in the universe. There's not even a suggestion of a solid." You are clearly an 'old school' remnant.

[@thedarkmoon2341]

@@ianw5439 How much did you pay for your academic brainwashing?

[@thedarkmoon2341]

@@ianw5439 "Get an education." Fuller felt that schools destroyed a child’s intuitive grasp of the world by forcing knowledge into silos. “He found the goal of education was to ‘de-genius’ the child, for, as he said, ‘every child is born a genius,’ In your case it would seem he was absolutely correct.

[@ready1fire1aim1]

Why does Newton say 0 and it's geometric counterpart 0D are "not-necessary"? Newton says 1, 2, 3 and 4 (and their geometric counterparts 1D-4D) are "necessary". But Newton is wrong. 1-4 and 1D-4D are "contingent" (on their predecessor). 0 and 0D are the only necessary number/dimension since they have no predecessor. Is Newton a fraud or what?

[@Nuts-Bolts]

Robitaille speaks with the authority of someone with enough degrees to get a job as a laboratory thermometer.

[@williamh4172]

Why are you here? Yes, this is basic to a chemist like me, but not everyone has that background.

[@DeathValleyDazed]

Some WD-40 might loosen you up? Username check out🥴

[@JoeDeglman]

Saw some newer videos on KZbin under 'Armchair Yoga' that might catch your interest.

[@ryanhegseth8720]

At least it’s not complicated.

[@barbaedozgrimjr9880]

Mate I've learnt so much watching you over the years recommended by Ben from suspiciousobvservers.. love your work Dr. And thankyou for your time

[@bushmangrizz4367]

As I thought, Deipatrous cannot answer his false claim that Dr. Robitaille did not invent and build the 8 T MRI machine. I'll ask again, do a literature search that other than clinicians, the "team" were all his students and post docs. None came to OSU with any NRMR or MRI experience as fas as I can tell. Unless you can prove otherwise, it seems quite obvious that Dr. Robitaille trained them all. Why don't you pull an Ian the Braveheart and call some of them up, or the university.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

@@DrWhom "Of course he didn't. He's completely incompetent." You get off on making BS statements thinking you are landing solid hits. To yourself that is. You get it that no one pays attention to you.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

@@DrWhom "The clinicians brought in the expertise via industry connections. Mr R does not even understand physics at the 101 level, let alone the sort of level of attainment we are talking about." You are a liar and a fraud on many levels. I'd bet a large sum of money that you have few, if any, friends, with the kind of lying that you use to discredit scientists far more accomplished than you. Dr. Robitaille's accomplishments are on the scientific record. You are garbage. A walking talking sack of sh*t.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

@@midlander4 Ooooo, yes. Yes. So angry. Good for you mind reader.

[@bushmangrizz4367]

@@midlander4 "cringe crothers and grizz... overturning physics one KZbin comment at a time" Cringe all of astrophysics. Defending the indefensible, one crackpot idea at a time.