What is the portion of atoms on Earth whose electrons lie outside the Milky Way?











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1












In this youtube video it is claimed that electrons orbit their atom's nucleus not in well-known fixed orbits, but within "clouds of probability", i.e., spaces around the nucleus where they can lie with a probability of 95%, called "orbitals".



It is also claimed that the further away one looks for the electron from the nucleus, the more this probability decreases, yet it never reaches 0. The authors of the video conclude that there is a non-zero probability for an atom to have its electron "on the other side of the Universe".



If this is true, then there must be a portion of all atoms on Earth whose electron lies outside the Milky Way. Which portion of atoms has this property?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 7




    What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results. From here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would fail. Does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily?
    – FGSUZ
    11 hours ago






  • 1




    @FGSUZ please post that as an answer, as it is the most correct thing written on this page so far. The $10^{-31}$ estimates posted below are silly for exactly the reason explained in your comment.
    – DanielSank
    11 hours ago










  • @DanielSank Thank you, I'm flattered, but do you really think it's an answer? I don't know if it actually "answers" the question..
    – FGSUZ
    11 hours ago






  • 1




    @FGSUZ, yes, I really think it answers the question.
    – DanielSank
    10 hours ago










  • Okay then, I just did.
    – FGSUZ
    1 hour ago















up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1












In this youtube video it is claimed that electrons orbit their atom's nucleus not in well-known fixed orbits, but within "clouds of probability", i.e., spaces around the nucleus where they can lie with a probability of 95%, called "orbitals".



It is also claimed that the further away one looks for the electron from the nucleus, the more this probability decreases, yet it never reaches 0. The authors of the video conclude that there is a non-zero probability for an atom to have its electron "on the other side of the Universe".



If this is true, then there must be a portion of all atoms on Earth whose electron lies outside the Milky Way. Which portion of atoms has this property?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 7




    What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results. From here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would fail. Does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily?
    – FGSUZ
    11 hours ago






  • 1




    @FGSUZ please post that as an answer, as it is the most correct thing written on this page so far. The $10^{-31}$ estimates posted below are silly for exactly the reason explained in your comment.
    – DanielSank
    11 hours ago










  • @DanielSank Thank you, I'm flattered, but do you really think it's an answer? I don't know if it actually "answers" the question..
    – FGSUZ
    11 hours ago






  • 1




    @FGSUZ, yes, I really think it answers the question.
    – DanielSank
    10 hours ago










  • Okay then, I just did.
    – FGSUZ
    1 hour ago













up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1






1





In this youtube video it is claimed that electrons orbit their atom's nucleus not in well-known fixed orbits, but within "clouds of probability", i.e., spaces around the nucleus where they can lie with a probability of 95%, called "orbitals".



It is also claimed that the further away one looks for the electron from the nucleus, the more this probability decreases, yet it never reaches 0. The authors of the video conclude that there is a non-zero probability for an atom to have its electron "on the other side of the Universe".



If this is true, then there must be a portion of all atoms on Earth whose electron lies outside the Milky Way. Which portion of atoms has this property?










share|cite|improve this question















In this youtube video it is claimed that electrons orbit their atom's nucleus not in well-known fixed orbits, but within "clouds of probability", i.e., spaces around the nucleus where they can lie with a probability of 95%, called "orbitals".



It is also claimed that the further away one looks for the electron from the nucleus, the more this probability decreases, yet it never reaches 0. The authors of the video conclude that there is a non-zero probability for an atom to have its electron "on the other side of the Universe".



If this is true, then there must be a portion of all atoms on Earth whose electron lies outside the Milky Way. Which portion of atoms has this property?







quantum-mechanics electrons wavefunction probability estimation






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 12 hours ago









Qmechanic

101k121821135




101k121821135










asked 13 hours ago









Klangen

1094




1094








  • 7




    What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results. From here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would fail. Does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily?
    – FGSUZ
    11 hours ago






  • 1




    @FGSUZ please post that as an answer, as it is the most correct thing written on this page so far. The $10^{-31}$ estimates posted below are silly for exactly the reason explained in your comment.
    – DanielSank
    11 hours ago










  • @DanielSank Thank you, I'm flattered, but do you really think it's an answer? I don't know if it actually "answers" the question..
    – FGSUZ
    11 hours ago






  • 1




    @FGSUZ, yes, I really think it answers the question.
    – DanielSank
    10 hours ago










  • Okay then, I just did.
    – FGSUZ
    1 hour ago














  • 7




    What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results. From here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would fail. Does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily?
    – FGSUZ
    11 hours ago






  • 1




    @FGSUZ please post that as an answer, as it is the most correct thing written on this page so far. The $10^{-31}$ estimates posted below are silly for exactly the reason explained in your comment.
    – DanielSank
    11 hours ago










  • @DanielSank Thank you, I'm flattered, but do you really think it's an answer? I don't know if it actually "answers" the question..
    – FGSUZ
    11 hours ago






  • 1




    @FGSUZ, yes, I really think it answers the question.
    – DanielSank
    10 hours ago










  • Okay then, I just did.
    – FGSUZ
    1 hour ago








7




7




What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results. From here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would fail. Does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily?
– FGSUZ
11 hours ago




What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results. From here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would fail. Does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily?
– FGSUZ
11 hours ago




1




1




@FGSUZ please post that as an answer, as it is the most correct thing written on this page so far. The $10^{-31}$ estimates posted below are silly for exactly the reason explained in your comment.
– DanielSank
11 hours ago




@FGSUZ please post that as an answer, as it is the most correct thing written on this page so far. The $10^{-31}$ estimates posted below are silly for exactly the reason explained in your comment.
– DanielSank
11 hours ago












@DanielSank Thank you, I'm flattered, but do you really think it's an answer? I don't know if it actually "answers" the question..
– FGSUZ
11 hours ago




@DanielSank Thank you, I'm flattered, but do you really think it's an answer? I don't know if it actually "answers" the question..
– FGSUZ
11 hours ago




1




1




@FGSUZ, yes, I really think it answers the question.
– DanielSank
10 hours ago




@FGSUZ, yes, I really think it answers the question.
– DanielSank
10 hours ago












Okay then, I just did.
– FGSUZ
1 hour ago




Okay then, I just did.
– FGSUZ
1 hour ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
6
down vote



accepted










The quantity you should consider first is the Bohr radius, this tells you an idea of the relevant atomic scales,



$$
a_0 = 5.29times 10^{-11} ~{rm m}
$$



For hydrogen (the most abundant element), in its ground state, the probability of finding an electron beyond a distance $r$ from the center looks something like (for $r gg a_0$)



$$
P(r) approx e^{-2r/a_0}
$$



Now let's plug in some numbers. The virial radius of the Milky Way is around $200 ~{rm kpc} approx 6times 10^{21}~{rm m}$, so the probability of finding an electron outside the MW from an atom on Earch is around



$$
P sim e^{-10^{32}}
$$



that's ... pretty low. But you don't need to go that far to show this effect, the probability that an electron of an atom in your foot is found in your hand is $sim 10^{-10^{10}}$






share|cite|improve this answer






























    up vote
    3
    down vote













    Given a single electron, what is the probability that it is found outside the Milky Way?
    We can estimate it using the ground state wave function of the Hydrogen atom,
    $$ psi_{100} = frac{1}{sqrt{pi a_0^3}} e^{-r/a_0} , $$
    where $a_0 approx 5*10^{-11}, m$ is the Bohr radius.
    $|psi|^2$ is the probability density, integrating gives
    $$ p_1 = int_R^infty |psi_{100}|^2 4pi r^2, dr = frac{e^{-2R/a_0}(a_0^2 + 2a_0 R + 2R^2)}{a_0^2} . $$
    Plugging in $R approx 5*10^{20}, m$ the radius of the Milky Way, we get
    $$ p_1 approx exp(-2*10^{31}) approx 10^{-10^{31}} . $$



    This number is so small, it is hardly possible to grasp really how small it is.
    There are a lot of electrons in the Earth - about $N = 10^{51}$ - but the number of electrons is utterly tiny compared to these odds. The chance that any electron is found outside the milky way is
    $$ p = 1 - (1 - p_1)^N approx N p_1 = 10^{51} , cdot , 10^{-10^{31}} $$
    which doesn't even make any dent.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • Since $10^{-51} approx e^{-117}$, can I estimate that the electron furthest from its nucleus in the all the Earth is about 117 Bohr radii away, on average, at any given time. Roughly?
      – JEB
      10 hours ago




















    up vote
    2
    down vote













    What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results.



    Take into account that the models are based on hypothesis, which are easily violated. For example, spherical symmetry, which allows finding the solution in the hydrogen atom (or more accurately, the Coulomb's potential in QM). Reality is never like that, but we can say that "it is close enough" if the atom is far enough from other objects.



    Nevertheless, from here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would just fail. You can say that there's a level $n=1324791$, but there are so many particles out there that the effect of your atom is absolutely beaten by ANY other.



    So, does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily? I don't think so.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "151"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f448573%2fwhat-is-the-portion-of-atoms-on-earth-whose-electrons-lie-outside-the-milky-way%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      6
      down vote



      accepted










      The quantity you should consider first is the Bohr radius, this tells you an idea of the relevant atomic scales,



      $$
      a_0 = 5.29times 10^{-11} ~{rm m}
      $$



      For hydrogen (the most abundant element), in its ground state, the probability of finding an electron beyond a distance $r$ from the center looks something like (for $r gg a_0$)



      $$
      P(r) approx e^{-2r/a_0}
      $$



      Now let's plug in some numbers. The virial radius of the Milky Way is around $200 ~{rm kpc} approx 6times 10^{21}~{rm m}$, so the probability of finding an electron outside the MW from an atom on Earch is around



      $$
      P sim e^{-10^{32}}
      $$



      that's ... pretty low. But you don't need to go that far to show this effect, the probability that an electron of an atom in your foot is found in your hand is $sim 10^{-10^{10}}$






      share|cite|improve this answer



























        up vote
        6
        down vote



        accepted










        The quantity you should consider first is the Bohr radius, this tells you an idea of the relevant atomic scales,



        $$
        a_0 = 5.29times 10^{-11} ~{rm m}
        $$



        For hydrogen (the most abundant element), in its ground state, the probability of finding an electron beyond a distance $r$ from the center looks something like (for $r gg a_0$)



        $$
        P(r) approx e^{-2r/a_0}
        $$



        Now let's plug in some numbers. The virial radius of the Milky Way is around $200 ~{rm kpc} approx 6times 10^{21}~{rm m}$, so the probability of finding an electron outside the MW from an atom on Earch is around



        $$
        P sim e^{-10^{32}}
        $$



        that's ... pretty low. But you don't need to go that far to show this effect, the probability that an electron of an atom in your foot is found in your hand is $sim 10^{-10^{10}}$






        share|cite|improve this answer

























          up vote
          6
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          6
          down vote



          accepted






          The quantity you should consider first is the Bohr radius, this tells you an idea of the relevant atomic scales,



          $$
          a_0 = 5.29times 10^{-11} ~{rm m}
          $$



          For hydrogen (the most abundant element), in its ground state, the probability of finding an electron beyond a distance $r$ from the center looks something like (for $r gg a_0$)



          $$
          P(r) approx e^{-2r/a_0}
          $$



          Now let's plug in some numbers. The virial radius of the Milky Way is around $200 ~{rm kpc} approx 6times 10^{21}~{rm m}$, so the probability of finding an electron outside the MW from an atom on Earch is around



          $$
          P sim e^{-10^{32}}
          $$



          that's ... pretty low. But you don't need to go that far to show this effect, the probability that an electron of an atom in your foot is found in your hand is $sim 10^{-10^{10}}$






          share|cite|improve this answer














          The quantity you should consider first is the Bohr radius, this tells you an idea of the relevant atomic scales,



          $$
          a_0 = 5.29times 10^{-11} ~{rm m}
          $$



          For hydrogen (the most abundant element), in its ground state, the probability of finding an electron beyond a distance $r$ from the center looks something like (for $r gg a_0$)



          $$
          P(r) approx e^{-2r/a_0}
          $$



          Now let's plug in some numbers. The virial radius of the Milky Way is around $200 ~{rm kpc} approx 6times 10^{21}~{rm m}$, so the probability of finding an electron outside the MW from an atom on Earch is around



          $$
          P sim e^{-10^{32}}
          $$



          that's ... pretty low. But you don't need to go that far to show this effect, the probability that an electron of an atom in your foot is found in your hand is $sim 10^{-10^{10}}$







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited 11 hours ago

























          answered 12 hours ago









          caverac

          4,4982618




          4,4982618






















              up vote
              3
              down vote













              Given a single electron, what is the probability that it is found outside the Milky Way?
              We can estimate it using the ground state wave function of the Hydrogen atom,
              $$ psi_{100} = frac{1}{sqrt{pi a_0^3}} e^{-r/a_0} , $$
              where $a_0 approx 5*10^{-11}, m$ is the Bohr radius.
              $|psi|^2$ is the probability density, integrating gives
              $$ p_1 = int_R^infty |psi_{100}|^2 4pi r^2, dr = frac{e^{-2R/a_0}(a_0^2 + 2a_0 R + 2R^2)}{a_0^2} . $$
              Plugging in $R approx 5*10^{20}, m$ the radius of the Milky Way, we get
              $$ p_1 approx exp(-2*10^{31}) approx 10^{-10^{31}} . $$



              This number is so small, it is hardly possible to grasp really how small it is.
              There are a lot of electrons in the Earth - about $N = 10^{51}$ - but the number of electrons is utterly tiny compared to these odds. The chance that any electron is found outside the milky way is
              $$ p = 1 - (1 - p_1)^N approx N p_1 = 10^{51} , cdot , 10^{-10^{31}} $$
              which doesn't even make any dent.






              share|cite|improve this answer





















              • Since $10^{-51} approx e^{-117}$, can I estimate that the electron furthest from its nucleus in the all the Earth is about 117 Bohr radii away, on average, at any given time. Roughly?
                – JEB
                10 hours ago

















              up vote
              3
              down vote













              Given a single electron, what is the probability that it is found outside the Milky Way?
              We can estimate it using the ground state wave function of the Hydrogen atom,
              $$ psi_{100} = frac{1}{sqrt{pi a_0^3}} e^{-r/a_0} , $$
              where $a_0 approx 5*10^{-11}, m$ is the Bohr radius.
              $|psi|^2$ is the probability density, integrating gives
              $$ p_1 = int_R^infty |psi_{100}|^2 4pi r^2, dr = frac{e^{-2R/a_0}(a_0^2 + 2a_0 R + 2R^2)}{a_0^2} . $$
              Plugging in $R approx 5*10^{20}, m$ the radius of the Milky Way, we get
              $$ p_1 approx exp(-2*10^{31}) approx 10^{-10^{31}} . $$



              This number is so small, it is hardly possible to grasp really how small it is.
              There are a lot of electrons in the Earth - about $N = 10^{51}$ - but the number of electrons is utterly tiny compared to these odds. The chance that any electron is found outside the milky way is
              $$ p = 1 - (1 - p_1)^N approx N p_1 = 10^{51} , cdot , 10^{-10^{31}} $$
              which doesn't even make any dent.






              share|cite|improve this answer





















              • Since $10^{-51} approx e^{-117}$, can I estimate that the electron furthest from its nucleus in the all the Earth is about 117 Bohr radii away, on average, at any given time. Roughly?
                – JEB
                10 hours ago















              up vote
              3
              down vote










              up vote
              3
              down vote









              Given a single electron, what is the probability that it is found outside the Milky Way?
              We can estimate it using the ground state wave function of the Hydrogen atom,
              $$ psi_{100} = frac{1}{sqrt{pi a_0^3}} e^{-r/a_0} , $$
              where $a_0 approx 5*10^{-11}, m$ is the Bohr radius.
              $|psi|^2$ is the probability density, integrating gives
              $$ p_1 = int_R^infty |psi_{100}|^2 4pi r^2, dr = frac{e^{-2R/a_0}(a_0^2 + 2a_0 R + 2R^2)}{a_0^2} . $$
              Plugging in $R approx 5*10^{20}, m$ the radius of the Milky Way, we get
              $$ p_1 approx exp(-2*10^{31}) approx 10^{-10^{31}} . $$



              This number is so small, it is hardly possible to grasp really how small it is.
              There are a lot of electrons in the Earth - about $N = 10^{51}$ - but the number of electrons is utterly tiny compared to these odds. The chance that any electron is found outside the milky way is
              $$ p = 1 - (1 - p_1)^N approx N p_1 = 10^{51} , cdot , 10^{-10^{31}} $$
              which doesn't even make any dent.






              share|cite|improve this answer












              Given a single electron, what is the probability that it is found outside the Milky Way?
              We can estimate it using the ground state wave function of the Hydrogen atom,
              $$ psi_{100} = frac{1}{sqrt{pi a_0^3}} e^{-r/a_0} , $$
              where $a_0 approx 5*10^{-11}, m$ is the Bohr radius.
              $|psi|^2$ is the probability density, integrating gives
              $$ p_1 = int_R^infty |psi_{100}|^2 4pi r^2, dr = frac{e^{-2R/a_0}(a_0^2 + 2a_0 R + 2R^2)}{a_0^2} . $$
              Plugging in $R approx 5*10^{20}, m$ the radius of the Milky Way, we get
              $$ p_1 approx exp(-2*10^{31}) approx 10^{-10^{31}} . $$



              This number is so small, it is hardly possible to grasp really how small it is.
              There are a lot of electrons in the Earth - about $N = 10^{51}$ - but the number of electrons is utterly tiny compared to these odds. The chance that any electron is found outside the milky way is
              $$ p = 1 - (1 - p_1)^N approx N p_1 = 10^{51} , cdot , 10^{-10^{31}} $$
              which doesn't even make any dent.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered 11 hours ago









              Noiralef

              3,7661927




              3,7661927












              • Since $10^{-51} approx e^{-117}$, can I estimate that the electron furthest from its nucleus in the all the Earth is about 117 Bohr radii away, on average, at any given time. Roughly?
                – JEB
                10 hours ago




















              • Since $10^{-51} approx e^{-117}$, can I estimate that the electron furthest from its nucleus in the all the Earth is about 117 Bohr radii away, on average, at any given time. Roughly?
                – JEB
                10 hours ago


















              Since $10^{-51} approx e^{-117}$, can I estimate that the electron furthest from its nucleus in the all the Earth is about 117 Bohr radii away, on average, at any given time. Roughly?
              – JEB
              10 hours ago






              Since $10^{-51} approx e^{-117}$, can I estimate that the electron furthest from its nucleus in the all the Earth is about 117 Bohr radii away, on average, at any given time. Roughly?
              – JEB
              10 hours ago












              up vote
              2
              down vote













              What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results.



              Take into account that the models are based on hypothesis, which are easily violated. For example, spherical symmetry, which allows finding the solution in the hydrogen atom (or more accurately, the Coulomb's potential in QM). Reality is never like that, but we can say that "it is close enough" if the atom is far enough from other objects.



              Nevertheless, from here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would just fail. You can say that there's a level $n=1324791$, but there are so many particles out there that the effect of your atom is absolutely beaten by ANY other.



              So, does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily? I don't think so.






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                2
                down vote













                What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results.



                Take into account that the models are based on hypothesis, which are easily violated. For example, spherical symmetry, which allows finding the solution in the hydrogen atom (or more accurately, the Coulomb's potential in QM). Reality is never like that, but we can say that "it is close enough" if the atom is far enough from other objects.



                Nevertheless, from here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would just fail. You can say that there's a level $n=1324791$, but there are so many particles out there that the effect of your atom is absolutely beaten by ANY other.



                So, does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily? I don't think so.






                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote









                  What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results.



                  Take into account that the models are based on hypothesis, which are easily violated. For example, spherical symmetry, which allows finding the solution in the hydrogen atom (or more accurately, the Coulomb's potential in QM). Reality is never like that, but we can say that "it is close enough" if the atom is far enough from other objects.



                  Nevertheless, from here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would just fail. You can say that there's a level $n=1324791$, but there are so many particles out there that the effect of your atom is absolutely beaten by ANY other.



                  So, does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily? I don't think so.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  What is said in the video is true, but... remember that the atomic theory is just that: a theory. The theory itself predicts that perturbations will have a really big influence on the results.



                  Take into account that the models are based on hypothesis, which are easily violated. For example, spherical symmetry, which allows finding the solution in the hydrogen atom (or more accurately, the Coulomb's potential in QM). Reality is never like that, but we can say that "it is close enough" if the atom is far enough from other objects.



                  Nevertheless, from here to outside of the milky way there are so many perturbations that the model would just fail. You can say that there's a level $n=1324791$, but there are so many particles out there that the effect of your atom is absolutely beaten by ANY other.



                  So, does it really make sense to calculate such probability if anything can capture that electron much more easily? I don't think so.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 1 hour ago









                  FGSUZ

                  3,4152521




                  3,4152521






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                      Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                      Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f448573%2fwhat-is-the-portion-of-atoms-on-earth-whose-electrons-lie-outside-the-milky-way%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Quarter-circle Tiles

                      build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

                      Mont Emei