Wave Model of an Electron

135 - Wave Model of an Electron
The wave model of the electron can be used to explain the Bohr model. Electrons are found in certain orbits because they interfere with themselves and create standing waves. When the wavelengths don’t match up with a whole integer they will create destructive interference. When electrons fall to a lower orbit they emit a photon. They can move to a higher orbit by absorbing an identical photon.
Do you speak another language? Help me translate my videos:
www.bozemanscience.com/transla...
Music Attribution
Title: String Theory
Artist: Herman Jolly
sunsetvalley.bandcamp.com/trac...
All of the images are licensed under creative commons and public domain licensing:
Chrisdesign. A Gibson Les Paul Guitar with Warm Flametopfinish., July 18, 2007. www.openclipart.org/detail/4444 (slightly tweaked and optimized by uploader). commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fil....
English: Colorful Spectrum simulationEspañol: Espectro de Colores de La Luz visibleEsperanto: Koloroj Videblaj中文（简体）‎: 软件模拟的可见光谱。中文（繁體）‎: 軟件模擬的可見光譜。, August 27, 2008. Digitally created by Deborah S Krolls, December 13, 2004. commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fil....
en.wikipedia, Original uplo:JabberWok]] at. A Vector Graphic Similar of an Image Originally Created by en:User:PAR, of the en:Bohr Model., February 23, 2007. Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fil....
Foundation, CK-12. English: The Standing Wave on the Left Exactly Fits in the Electron Cloud and Hence Represents an “Allowed” Energy Level Whereas the Standing Wave on the Right Does Not Fit in the Electron Cloud and Therefore Is Not an “Allowed” Energy Level., February 22, 2010. File:High School Chemistry.pdf, page 238. commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fil....
“Gas-Filled Tube.” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia, January 31, 2015. en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?t....
“Guitar Harmonics A Minor .wav by Panta_rei.” Freesound.org. Accessed April 21, 2015. www.freesound.org/people/panta....
Kurzon. English: A Simple Illustration of Bohr’s Model of the Atom, with an Electron Making Quantum Leaps., April 14, 2014. Own work. commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fil....
standwave2.gif, n.d. commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fil....

[@sverres2400]

Finally a somewhat understandable explanation of the wave model. Helps a bunch!

[@Shackled]

I have written several theoretical papers on the advancement of gravity and our understanding of the standard model. I still come back. To these videos to double check my foundations of knowledge. Thank you so much for these.

[@TheGamingTool]

Okay, I am just trying to imagine what scientists must have thought when they found this result. I mean think about it, the electron is literally so fast that it creates interference with itself. That statement is a literal mind fuck. Excuse my language, but that is the only apt description for such a great phenomenon.

[@Layarion]

yes i'd like to know how this even works.

[@elsiiitigertiger3786]

why did I learn more about this in a 2 minute video than a 45 minute class session

[@jacqueschannel4538]

Because you not listening

[@Layarion]

@@jacqueschannel4538 you must have some exceptional teachers in every class you go to, ever.

[@sophiemurphy7602]

ikr same here

[@sophiemurphy7602]

One of the clearest videos I've found on this subject- thanks so much! It actually makes more sense now! :) :)

[@kiranrq9387]

Amazing stuff so glad I clicked on your video for such advance wave particle duality nature of electron. Electron moves around nucleus so that's why it gives round standing wave( in first orbit at least) unlike light waves which travel in forward direction. This video also cleared why shells have different shapes in an atom---> because they travel in hormanic motions

[@klaus6178]

I can't thank you enough for this very concise video.

[@emmyawaba]

That was helpful and clear. thank you

[@AqsaJaved_]

i really found it helpful. keep uploading. thanks a million.

[@HowToGuys]

Thanks that was helpful!

[@emmaforti4672]

THANK YOU NOW I FEEL LIKE I CAN UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING

[@blueckaym]

yeah, that's a common mistake ;) I'm always amazed how some of the smartest people on Earth, for example Niels Bohr can fall to the assumption that if you don't see something it (actually!) doesn't exist!

[@smkartha]

very helpful video for visualizing how electorns behave in waves

[@avijitmajumdar9274]

I am really very much thankful to you, sir for the brilliant explanation...it was very much troubling me😊😊😊😊

[@parsafakhar]

Mr Anderson welcome back we missed you!

[@ThePhysicist]

Very helpful indeed. Thank you.

[@ahappyimago]

FANTASTIC!

[@SogMosee]

Indeed it was, thank you. And when the electron transitions between orbitals, that is called "quantum jumping" right?

[@muhamedarbaz4521]

Thank you sir it is really helpful for me to study easily ! Keep it up to make students study easily!

[@wills8288]

Nice video Bozeman

[@dalenassar9152]

I have two questions about these 'wrapped-around' sine waves: 1) What can be said about the amplitude of the sine, ie. can it peak to the other levels and thus overlap with them? 2) Assuming the sinusoidal electrons exist in 3D, what is the volume coverage around the nucleus, or with respect to it's 'circular' orbit? Thanks, and thumbs up!

[@kevg644]

Coolest concept ever! 👍🏾

[@arsiwalahhuzefa]

Cannot ask for a better explanation !

[@angelacenerino7905]

Thank you so much!

[@ethereal1003]

thank you for this video

[@user-dk2ev9xs9k]

Short but sweet great video thx a lot

[@Layarion]

wait, i wish you explained more about waves before going into this then, and 2) what would make them emit or absorb photons?

[@adhit528]

for n = 2, there are two wavelength size needed for a wave to make the standing wave, But for an electron, size of its wave can have around its wavelength (is it true?) so how the wave will interfere with its own wave in a circular path ?

[@prakashsahu4332]

Great Explanation Sir. Love from India.

[@itay6412]

I hope so, and I hope that was helpful.

[@davidanon2742]

great job

[@llnam12]

What if an electron is a standing wave while a photon is a traveling wave and they are actually the same thing.

[@jannatjabeen8997]

This lecture is very helpful..thankuuu..

[@redaabakhti768]

extremely helpful

[@adivtyakasana3328]

It was seriously aweeesome

[@Pa1_Thakur]

I subscribed just becos of this video. Sehr gut!

[@amrutvani2]

Succinct and lucid. Thanks

[@lukewarmbeverage6088]

What does it mean if the amplitude of the wave is higher or lower, how does that effect the electrons movements/interactions.

[@TheLivirus]

This model pictures electrons as particles which oscillate in their orbit around the nucleus and that discrete stable orbits relate to the electron's electromagnetic interaction with itself. Can this be used to understand the wave-particle duality?

[@ashishdwivedi9916]

very helpful ,thank u

[@TomHendricksMusea]

This will challenge. 1. Positrons and electrons are also waves. 2. When a positron and electron meet they annihilate into pure energy just like destructive interference of two mirror waves. 3. That suggests that positrons and electrons are mirror image waves. 4. That suggests that positive and negative charge are the same waves with this difference; they are mirror images of each other.

[@corbynjohannes6422]

Is It possible to form a standing wave outside the atom with electrons?

[@Differendramovies]

Marvellous

[@franciajaimescardenas7323]

Gracias,!

[@Starboy_tw]

In India , there's a book named: MHTCET Triumph Chemistry. It has a QR which direct to your video 🙌

[@dylanparker130]

so, are you saying that an electron itself behaves like a travelling wave but because it interferes with itself / another electron, a standing wave is produced as a result? apologies for being dense & thank you for the video!

[@mirartsciencesound5504]

In which waveform are we committed, to open source fgs, 0..1 to 1 would count for interaction from the void to space? i mean from the black hole to 1 ,are these neutrons or what?

[@harryvu9437]

this will help me with quanta to quark

[@PhilMoskowitz]

1:18 - Sounds a lot like De Broglie's underrated Pilot waves.

[@dylanstone2378]

My guess is when an electron travels as a wave the energy inside the wave is uneven and there's one point that's denser than the rest or has more energy in that one point of the wave whenever you observe it you cause the rest of the energy in the wave to be pulled to the dentist point in the wave causing it to create a particle just going off what I know from the effects of the electron and the photon the photon always goes through the slits but the electron doesn't which means it has to be something within the electron causing it not to go through the slits

[@johndoe-bq1xt]

Great video,that was really helpful in visualizing the electrons as waves in an atom. My confusion is this. A photon is an electromagnetic wave packet and an electron is also a wave packet , BUT whats the wave packet made out of. In what medium is the electron wave packet propagating in ?

[@vineetasharma3722]

Same question!

[@oliviabrennan3433]

hmm i would like to know also

[@aunmaqsood8227]

From my limited understanding, wave packets are quantized units of energy, and so from our knowledge of the universe so far, we don't know if that wave packet can be broken down further. Since all subatomic particles have that Wave-particle duality, we have to assume that these wave packets cannot be broken down (hence why they are called "quantum"). I'm not sure of which medium it would propagate though, may have to look into that further.

[@catalyst9317]

What I don't understand is what happens when you add a second electron to a given orbital (e.g. Hydrogen vs. Helium). How does this change the shape of the wave? I'm really looking for a semi-technical, but fairly conceptual explanation of the Paul Exclusion Principle. All the other vids on KZbin are either trivial or Schrodinger-level complex. Need something in the middle!

[@rocketman5004]

So are elctrons able to just cancel each other out when they hit each other in the wrong way? And isn't this concept complicating electricity in the form of electron-flow?

[@billbadiha9836]

How do you explain wireless induction? What is a field?

[@assadij]

Just a quick correction. You've said 1st, 2nd, etc fundamental for the guitar string vibration. But there's only one fundamental and the rest are the harmonics of the fundamental. Thanks. Great, great work.

[@HansenSWE]

James A And that one and only fundamental is heavy metal. \m/

[@anno.7465]

+James A it just depends on the curriculum really, I've heard both terms used to refer to the same thing

[@siddharthsahu8118]

yup I've heard both being used to. Just 0 1 2 or 1 2 3 really.

[@smileforthesun]

Mr. Andersen I watch science videos for fun when I'm not working on my actual majors but I was wondering if the electrons use the energy from protons to orbit around them as they do. You mentioned how they change states and release a photon. Is the electron trying to use the energy from the proton to leave the orbit? I only ask this because it seems that the electron falls closer to the proton and then leaves at a greater orbit distance. Does it gain enough energy to get to a higher state, but since the higher state orbit requires more energy it may run out of energy and releases it's energy as it drops? I'm sure there is an answer but as I said I only learn this stuff for fun.

[@anishthakkar82]

that was helpful

[@adityajha8701]

U r so good

[@abdulkaderfaisal1388]

absolutely

[@primodernious]

first line i say cant exist in vacuum independently of an atom , i meant can exist.

[@mhhndeable]

So the photon released as wave or particle? And did anyone use this to explain photoelectric effects?

[@esamjassim]

The thing is photons behave as a wave and a partical

[@mdshirajuddin7598]

TYSM

[@alexanderhugestrand]

This model is good to calculate things, but there are a couple of things that are strange to me... First, the orbit is calculated as a two dimensional circle, while the electron is somewhere along the surface of a sphere. Is there some 3D version of this math that gives the same results? Second, if it's a standing wave, and since it's a wave function we are talking about here (isn't it?), it should be interpreted as a probability wave... I guess? If so, the electron can't exist in the nodes of the wave. But it does as far as I know. So what does this wave model actually describe?

[@DoktorIgnaz]

Very good questions, I'd like to know as well! (especially the 3D part)

[@cslloyd1]

why do we think electrons' orbitals change circumference? why can't they simply change the frequency of a standing wave and not change the circumference of their orbital?

[@H3dgeh0g12]

My teacher: atoms are NOT solid balls This guy: standing waves show...

[@kisho2679]

why interferes the electrin with itself?

[@animals42life8]

What do you exactly mean by electrons interfering with themselves?

[@Sk-tb7kt]

Look into the Veritasium vid "The Original Double Slit Experiment" it covers constructive vs destructive wave interference/interaction nicely

[@RRana678]

Wow

[@YashwantRasane]

I have a question (doubt) , why standing waves do not emit energy?

[@pebblenapkins]

cause they are stationary. The rest of the wave whips back and forth

[@aashishanand1423]

does the electron itself orbit in a wavy zigzag path?

[@schmetterling4477]

No. Electrons don't orbit at all. :-)

[@adosar7261]

is electron a probability wave or a standing wave ?

[@catalyst9317]

Undisturbed, the electron is a clean, standing wave. But when measured by humans, it collapses into a single data point. Repeated measurements will produce a probability distribution showing the rough, cloud-like pattern of the original standing wave. This is why the "Electron Cloud Model" and "Quantum Model" of the atom are just two sides of the same coin.

[@vineetasharma3722]

Waves of what ?

[@giretino3922]

yes

[@adriangheorghe2327]

Electronul este o unda stationara de mare amplitudine, care se roteste, cu viteza c/137 (m/s) pe cercul de raza electronului Re. Este o unda bipolara, formata din doua semiunde diametral opuse, care prin rotatia lor foarte rapida de 10^20 (rot/s), genereaza in spatiul din jur campul electric pulsatoriu care face sarcina electrica a electronului. Unda stationara, bipolara si de mare amplitudine se constituie din insumarea prin mecanismul interferentei constructive ale celor 9 miliarde de unde componente ale fotonului gama electronic. La patrunderea fotonului in mediul cu densitate energetica foarte mare, din jurul nucleului, fotonul gama electronic se contracta longitudinal de 137 de ori si transversal de 4 ori. Si dupa o refractie la 360 de grade, undele in succesiunea lor fiind in faza se insumeaza, adica se aduna potentialele de semiunda date de relatia Ufv=Qe/Re=5,686.10^-5 (V). Potentialul de semiunda este o constanta componenta a constantei de actiune h si se gaseste la descifrarea semnificatiei fizice a constantei sau cuantei de actiune a lui Planck h. The electron is a stationary wave of high amplitude, which rotates with the speed c/137 (m/s) on the circle of the electron radius Re. It is a bipolar wave, formed by two diametrically opposite half-waves, which through their very fast rotation of 10^20 (rot/s), generate in the surrounding space the pulsating electric field that makes the electric charge of the electron. The stationary, bipolar and high-amplitude wave consists of the summation through the constructive interference mechanism of the 9 billion component waves of the electronic gamma photon. When the photon enters the environment with very high energy density, around the nucleus, the electronic gamma photon contracts longitudinally 137 times and transversely 4 times. And after a 360-degree refraction, the waves in their sequence being in phase are summed, that is, the half-wave potentials given by the relationship Ufv=Qe/Re=5,686.10^-5 (V) are added. The half-wave potential is a constant component of the action constant h and is found when deciphering the physical meaning of Planck's constant or action quantum h.

[@hudsonmueller3501]

It's a moment like this where I realize that maybe I'm just not smart enough to understand certain concepts

[@captainamericawhyso5917]

Is electron a standing wave, or does it move in a standing wave's orbit? In your animation, it seems to be the second one, but when searching this online, it says that the electron IS a standing wave

[@schmetterling4477]

No, that's not what an electron is. He is simply putting a lot of nonsense into your brain here that you will have to unlearn completely if you want to understand the actual facts.

[@captainamericawhyso5917]

@schmetterling4477 thanks for taking the time to reply🥹

[@schmetterling4477]

@@captainamericawhyso5917 We taught you the actual facts in high school, by the way. You already know (or could know) how it really works, if you have (had) been paying close attention to your science textbook.

[@elifece7847]

I go like wave

[@Sysiu]

there is a problem. if an election is created in a symertic way from the decay of neutron, the charge in the new proton must also be a wave within that proton.

[@solapowsj25]

Two standing waves interfere (transfer force) where they meet. The probability that two waves of light meet in our universe is ZERO.

[@pangeagamestudios]

electrons dont circle around the nucleus and they certainly dont interfere with other electrons to create the standing wave. The information is dated. The shear nuclear forces in the atom create the spherical harmonics in the gaussian medium that binds the atom together like a water filled balloon bouncing around. The spherical harmonics create these sub shells or ripples of this gaussian medium we call charge quanta. We mistake these rippes as electrons spinning around the nucleus when they are nothin but ripples of something even more elementary.

[@primodernious]

the electron don't need protons and neutrons to exist. instead thy cant exist in vacuum independtly of a atom. even being accelerated. if electrons are attracted to protons, they are rather orbiting atoms rather than being a function of the atom. if the electron is created from a wave, the proton and the neuron must also be created from a wave, and if electron are elusive in existence, then they must be created and destroynd itermittedly by a wave that is brought in and out of phase with itself, and protons and neutrons must be stationary concepts of a wave brough out of phase with itself, and most likely the protons and neutrons are made of electorns in a standingwave confinement where they act as a cloud of particles apperaing and dissapering giving the rise of the mass of the proton and neutron. in that case there is a phase shifting quality of interference that drive the existence of the permanment property of the atom as if there is a subtly macrocosmic change to the arragement within the proton and the neutron must change as much as the randomness of the electrons. in other words, its would not be the atoms that are waveing but instead the atoms are made of waves that are phase shifting particles temporarly into existence in a symmetry of more solid and persistent particles of larger mass.

[@pebblenapkins]

this answered my existential crisis thank u

[@jameszhang1989]

my head hurts

[@TacSprint]

*standING not StandEEN...

[@bizarrehuh8076]

ahhhhhh

[@TomHendricksMusea]

Physics - what if? What if neutrons and protons are waves? What if the so called magical shells that make up a nucleus, resemble the much larger electron shells? What if the center of the nucleus is empty? What if the magic numbers of 2, 8, 20, 28, are shells of waves such that there is incredible constructive interference from their waves at each shell, but not in between the shells? What if this incredible constructive interference is a very strong force? What if a proton wave has two crests and one trough, (2/3+/13-,2/3+) and a neutron has one crest and two troughs? What if neutrons and protons are fundamental particles? What if we don't need quarks? What if the mass of neutrons and protons is almost all binding energy. What if the mass of neutrons, protons, and electrons are all the same. What if they are all waves? What if they are all fundamental particles or fundamental waves. What if charge (negative or positive) is the meeting of waves from an electron and proton that are exactly opposite in their wave structure such that together they make waves that are destructive interference, and set up a field of destructive interference waves - which is what charges is? What if this meeting of waves explains why the amount of negative particles and positive particles are exactly the same? What if waves meet, not one at a time, but in fields; such that there are fields of constructive or destructive interference between the waves.? What if the zoo of particles is really just a zoo of waves? What if ....

[@steghuman9063]

Speculating that an electron is a particle orbiting, is really simply pure speculation. It may well be that there are resonances happening at such rapid and (small) rates that we have as yet not been able to measure let alone artificially duplicate,,,, look at the rough example of cymatics (the way matter forms geometrical shapes at certain sound frequencies). Look at the magnets field it is toroidal, both expanding and collapsing simultaneously. Perhaps we are looking at things incorrectly, imagine that gravity and heat are interactive gravity attempting to collapse heat,,, inner heat that is attempting to expand , now this is the fun bit,,, this is happening instantaneously, it is just we can only observe the different slower and larger resonances at the scale we exist at,, those that are applicable to form at an atomic scale (subatomic) , Ie hydrogen may be @ ??????????????????????????????Htz. we cannot possibly measure those kinds of high frequencies yet, (((((YET)))) but we can view the interaction via chemical and high-frequency electrical reactions. Bonding and repulsion could entirely be due to the meshing of (atoms) resonant frequencies, like harmonics as you stated. Look at the sun for a massive in ya face model,,, massive heat massive gravity,, gravity attempting to collapse the heat toward a center that is attempting to expand, we can certainly measure the myriad of resonances the sun emits. Look into deep space the sheer mind-boggling scale,,,, inner space may well be the same at a scale we cannot see yet. the in between is where all the (good vibrations) happen... After all perfection is a symmetry betwixt before and after , elusive omnipresent,,, we can only know of the before and after the constant singularity.

[@carlahadden8594]

this was from a random word generator lol

[@donyagoodarzi9321]

مدل موجی الکترون

[@donyagoodarzi9321]

translation:تداخل،موج ایستاده مانند آنچه در گیتار است.به دلیل حرکت الکترون ها به دور مدار اطراف هسته، انرژی آزاد شده=سرعت موج تقسیم بر طول موج ضرب در تعداد موج و ثابت پلانک.

[@ethankim5216]

worst teacher i've ever had

[@dallasrieck7753]

"did you learn", how about "hope you understand what I shared". > less conceit 😉

[@igorchurin7295]

Superficial presentation, does not prove anything.

[@schmetterling4477]

Yes, this was bullshit. People need to stop repeating physics bullshit. We know much better now.

[@jeniamalugin8206]

As if it's only a matter of ignorant time for Wallter Bowman Russell cosmogony Is worldwide .acknowledged The more we learn about similarities the more we realise we know even more