Geometry of Electron Shells

RenaissanceBiker said:
I'm an atheist and I like to think I am honest. I do believe in science and logic. I believe there are 5 beers in my 'fridge. I am willing to change my beliefs if I am presented with new information. You seem to be playing numerology with science to reinforce you beliefs of some vague purpose for the universe. There probably isn't one. I can't speak for the others, but I call you nuts because you keep trying to convince others that your obsession with these numbers is proof of something.
Click to expand...

Biker, I hate to inform you, but I think your fridge is empty, and I'm pretty sure you don't have gas in your gas tank. Thanks for the confirmation.
 
Davidjayjordan said:
O.K. I have established that the simple easy to understand Platonic Solids or geometric figures are the answer and solution to why there are 2, 8, 18, and 32 electrons in full shells..
Click to expand...

Man, you are wrong, as has been explained.

The reason why there are 2, 8, 18 etc electrons in full shells is because 1) 1, 4, and 9, etc, are the number of solutions to second order differential equations like the Schroedinger equation. That there is correlation with Platonic solids has to do with the mathematical relationship between geometry and spherical harmonics. That relationship is true regardless of whether you apply them to atoms or not. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that the properties of platonic solids are also due to spherical harmonics, but all that indicates is that both patterns originate in the same mathematical principles, not that one causes the other (in fact, it implies spherical harmonics as the basis for everything, NOT platonic solids - the properties of which are derived from SH). Of course, there is also 2) the Pauli principle, which states that the wave functions for particles like electrons must be anti-symmtric with respect to exchange. The consequence of the Pauli principle, of course, is that there cannot be more than two electrons in each available sub-shell.

BTW, I forgot to mention, that another important factor is the fact that electrons can only have one of two spin states, either an alpha spin wave function (which has angular momentum of +1/2hbar) or the beta wave function (momentum is -1/2hbar). Were electrons to have more possible spin states, it would be possible to put more than two electrons in a sub-shell.
 
Davidjayjordan said:
Biker, I hate to inform you, but I think your fridge is empty, and I'm pretty sure you don't have gas in your gas tank. Thanks for the confirmation.
Click to expand...

If you drank my beer without asking I'm going to have to kick your a$$. I do know that I have half a tank of gas in my truck and a full tank of gas in my bike. If you are speaking metaphorically then you have stooped to name calling, and that makes you a poopie-head.
 
pgwenthold said:
Man, you are wrong, as has been explained.

The reason why there are 2, 8, 18 etc electrons in full shells is because 1) 1, 4, and 9, etc, are the number of solutions to second order differential equations like the Schroedinger equation. That there is correlation with Platonic solids has to do with the mathematical relationship between geometry and spherical harmonics. That relationship is true regardless of whether you apply them to atoms or not. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that the properties of platonic solids are also due to spherical harmonics, but all that indicates is that both patterns originate in the same mathematical principles, not that one causes the other (in fact, it implies spherical harmonics as the basis for everything, NOT platonic solids - the properties of which are derived from SH). Of course, there is also 2) the Pauli principle, which states that the wave functions for particles like electrons must be anti-symmtric with respect to exchange. The consequence of the Pauli principle, of course, is that there cannot be more than two electrons in each available sub-shell.

BTW, I forgot to mention, that another important factor is the fact that electrons can only have one of two spin states, either an alpha spin wave function (which has angular momentum of +1/2hbar) or the beta wave function (momentum is -1/2hbar). Were electrons to have more possible spin states, it would be possible to put more than two electrons in a sub-shell.
Click to expand...

It's a strange Universe we live in. Is mathematics an emergent property of reality, or is reality an emergent property of mathematics? Or, are they both somehow emergent properties of each other?

Whatever the answer is, I don't think the ancient Greeks stumbled on it.
 
Davidjayjordan said:
Biker, I hate to inform you, but I think your fridge is empty, and I'm pretty sure you don't have gas in your gas tank. Thanks for the confirmation.
Click to expand...

And I am certain you have no bread in your breadbox and I am more certain your toilet constantly overflows.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Davidjayjordan said:
poor Wolley, you had to run back to your security blanket, as one on one discussion made you extremely nervous.

I mean, we haven't used that discussion board for years, and went rather to newgroups where people have to apply for membership and have to follow rules to saty within.

But if nothing is what you want and you want to promote nothing and stand for nothing, so be it ..your choice Wolley....

Besides Wolley, all I am doing HERE is stating what I stated to you THERE about chemistry and you conveniently overlooked it. But do notice that some researchers were trying to solve the Mystery of the Electron Shells HERE.
Click to expand...
Discussion? You wouldn't know a discussion if it hit you upside the head!
 
s, p, d ,f = Schrodinger, Pauli, Dirac, Fermi?
It's a shame that that is just a coincidence...

The next shell designation is 'g'.
 
aggle-rithm said:
It's a strange Universe we live in. Is mathematics an emergent property of reality, or is reality an emergent property of mathematics? Or, are they both somehow emergent properties of each other?
Click to expand...

I vote for the latter. I like to think of of things like pi and the natural exponent. Mathematically, there are so many different ways to express pi. Physically, there different ways that pi reveals itself, not all of which are expressly obvious mathematically. Yet, there it is as a persistent component of all we do and see.

In the same way are the properties of the spherical harmonics.
 
Pidge said:
s, p, d ,f = Schrodinger, Pauli, Dirac, Fermi?
It's a shame that that is just a coincidence...

The next shell designation is 'g'.
Click to expand...
DF_guinness_366.jpg
 
Davidjayjordan said:
But do notice that some researchers were trying to solve the Mystery of the Electron Shells HERE.
Click to expand...

David,

As you like to use capitals to "prove" your experience and insight: THERE IS NO MYSTERY ABOUT EITHER THE SHAPE OR COMPLEMENT OF ELECTRON SHELLS! There you are: that was all in capitals. That makes me righter than you.

You are trying to create a mystical and supposedly "deep" explanation for something that has already been explained. The fact is that quantum mechanics has made many, many predictions that have been proved. Solar cells, lasers, transistors, LEDs, the Scanning Electron Microscope, the Scanning Tunnelling Microscope, Magnetic Resonance Imaging and many more inventions have come about solely from an understanding of quantum mechanics - they weren't just lucky guesses.

If quantum mechanics is wrong, it means that all these everyday inventions are unbelievably remarkable flukes that happen to work despite being based on incorrect theory.

I suppose you can show how your marvellous new Platonic Solids theory fully explains the working of a bipolar junction transistor, since QM is so wrong? I used to be an electronics component engineer, so this is a subject in which I have considerable experience.
 
pgwenthold said:
Man, you are wrong, as has been explained.

The reason why there are 2, 8, 18 etc electrons in full shells is because 1) 1, 4, and 9, etc, are the number of solutions to second order differential equations like the Schroedinger equation. That there is correlation with Platonic solids has to do with the mathematical relationship between geometry and spherical harmonics. That relationship is true regardless of whether you apply them to atoms or not. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that the properties of platonic solids are also due to spherical harmonics, but all that indicates is that both patterns originate in the same mathematical principles, not that one causes the other (in fact, it implies spherical harmonics as the basis for everything, NOT platonic solids - the properties of which are derived from SH). Of course, there is also 2) the Pauli principle, which states that the wave functions for particles like electrons must be anti-symmtric with respect to exchange. The consequence of the Pauli principle, of course, is that there cannot be more than two electrons in each available sub-shell.

BTW, I forgot to mention, that another important factor is the fact that electrons can only have one of two spin states, either an alpha spin wave function (which has angular momentum of +1/2hbar) or the beta wave function (momentum is -1/2hbar). Were electrons to have more possible spin states, it would be possible to put more than two electrons in a sub-shell.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the confirmation of spins (sexuality) and confirmation that the Platonic Solids are harmonic with the number of electrons in the shells....and as I pointed out 1, 2 , 3 , 4 shells the square of which times 2 = 2, 8, 18, and 32 ..... I appreciate your honest confirmation.

And will be back to write more about your confirming post in detail. Much appreciated.

Sincerely In His Service

David
 
Davidjayjordan said:
First you have to admit that you haven't got any ideas or see any connections, or know any reasons for these full shell numbers. That's fine.

So Yes, Zep, I should give you my idea... this even though if any would have taken GEOMETRY seriously and studied just a reasonable amount. They might have come up with the obvious answer.

Equality of distances in a sphere or a shell is surely the answer.

So even though you can't prove or answer questions or skepticism about nothing because you have nothing, let me suggest this Answer.

http://www.geocities.com/davidjayjordan/GeometryofElectronPlacement.html

It has some graphics which make it easier to comprehend..

I'm just finnishing it off, and will be changing a few parts and adding more of a conclusion.... as true skeptics come to conclusions and try to establish order and laws out of chaos and seeming meaningless.

Math is the answer, equi-distances is the answer. And P******** S****** is the answer...

And surely by now you understand what P.S. stands for....

IHS

david
Click to expand...

This is NOT a school lesson. This is NOT how you do science. I am waiting for YOU to tell US your amazing knowledge.

Let me repeat: TRUE skeptics show their ALL workings out. So we expect the same from you.

All I can see from you is trolling to push up your own website counters. If that's all you are here for, the game has been obvious for some time. And it's failing. Your website is so full of random ◊◊◊◊◊ that it makes no sense at all. None. Nada. Nothing.

Now. Lay out HERE all your amazing theories and have them examined by people who do this for a living. If you won't then we will be forced to conclude you are simply full of it and a troll. Or that you need to have your head shrunk. And I am pretty sure that you can guess which way the general consensus is heading about now.

OK? Now get on with it, why don't you.
 
Davidjayjordan said:
Thanks for the confirmation of spins (sexuality) and confirmation that the Platonic Solids are harmonic with the number of electrons in the shells....and as I pointed out 1, 2 , 3 , 4 shells the square of which times 2 = 2, 8, 18, and 32 ..... I appreciate your honest confirmation.

And will be back to write more about your confirming post in detail. Much appreciated.

Sincerely In His Service

David
Click to expand...
This is NOT a school lesson. This is NOT how you do science. I am waiting for YOU to tell US your amazing knowledge.

Let me repeat: TRUE skeptics show their ALL workings out. So we expect the same from you.

All I can see from you is trolling to push up your own website counters. If that's all you are here for, the game has been obvious for some time. And it's failing. Your website is so full of random ◊◊◊◊◊ that it makes no sense at all. None. Nada. Nothing.

Now. Lay out HERE all your amazing theories and have them examined by people who do this for a living. If you won't then we will be forced to conclude you are simply full of it and a troll. Or that you need to have your head shrunk. And I am pretty sure that you can guess which way the general consensus is heading about now.

OK? Now get on with it, why don't you.
 
Davidjayjordan said:
Biker, I hate to inform you, but I think your fridge is empty, and I'm pretty sure you don't have gas in your gas tank. Thanks for the confirmation.
Click to expand...
This is NOT a school lesson. This is NOT how you do science. I am waiting for YOU to tell US your amazing knowledge.

Let me repeat: TRUE skeptics show their ALL workings out. So we expect the same from you.

All I can see from you is trolling to push up your own website counters. If that's all you are here for, the game has been obvious for some time. And it's failing. Your website is so full of random ◊◊◊◊◊ that it makes no sense at all. None. Nada. Nothing.

Now. Lay out HERE all your amazing theories and have them examined by people who do this for a living. If you won't then we will be forced to conclude you are simply full of it and a troll. Or that you need to have your head shrunk. And I am pretty sure that you can guess which way the general consensus is heading about now.

OK? Now get on with it, why don't you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom