Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
1–10 of 207 posts
Re: Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
#2> The increased nuclear mass causes orbiting electrons to speed up to a significant fraction of the speed of light, where the rules of Einstein’s theory of relativity are important.
> In the relativistic regime, an electron’s spin — the magnetic moment that points either up or down — and the electron’s orbit are no longer independent of each other, a state known as spin-orbit coupling.
Interesting stuff. I've never heard of sigma or pi bonds.
Re: Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
#3For context: this is one more experimental confirmation of Dirac's equations (incorporating special relativity into quantum physics).
Very cool.
The paper PDF: https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.brown.edu/dist/0/196/fil...
Re: Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
#4> The increased nuclear mass causes orbiting electrons to speed up to a significant fraction of the speed of light, where the rules of Einstein’s theory of relativity are important. > In the relativistic regime, an electron’s spin — the magnetic moment that points either up or down — and the electron’s orbit are no longer independent of each other, a state known as spin-orbit coupling. Interesting stuff. I've never h…
[deleted]
Re: Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
#5> The increased nuclear mass causes orbiting electrons to speed up to a significant fraction of the speed of light, where the rules of Einstein’s theory of relativity are important. > In the relativistic regime, an electron’s spin — the magnetic moment that points either up or down — and the electron’s orbit are no longer independent of each other, a state known as spin-orbit coupling. Interesting stuff. I've never h…
Sigma and Pi bonds are typically covered in AP Chemistry, even if the “why/how” is hand waved pretty heavily. The valence cloud shapes get wild for heavier atoms and bonds between two or more atoms add even more to the mix.
Re: Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
#6Relativity is also responsible for a lot of weird behaviors of heavy elements, such as the color of gold. Or that lead is a good material for batteries.
Re: Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
#7> The increased nuclear mass causes orbiting electrons to speed up to a significant fraction of the speed of light, where the rules of Einstein’s theory of relativity are important. > In the relativistic regime, an electron’s spin — the magnetic moment that points either up or down — and the electron’s orbit are no longer independent of each other, a state known as spin-orbit coupling. Interesting stuff. I've never h…
Sigma and Pi bonds are typically covered in AP Chemistry, even if the “why/how” is hand waved pretty heavily. The valence cloud shapes get wild for heavier atoms and bonds between two or more atoms add even more to the mix.
I had incredible difficulties with Chemistry, more than any other subject, because most everything was hand waved away, requiring mostly rote memorization. I could never get an intuitive understanding, partly because my profs seemingly refusing to think about things from a physics perspective. My physics prof was able to help with some of it. It was very odd.
If I would have stuck with it, would things have improved?
Re: Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sigma and Pi bonds are typically covered in AP Chemistry, even if the “why/how” is hand waved pretty heavily. The valence cloud shapes get wild for heavier atoms and bonds between two or more atoms add even more to the mix.
I had incredible difficulties with Chemistry, more than any other subject, because most everything was hand waved away, requiring mostly rote memorization. I could never get an intuitive understanding, partly because my profs seemingly refusing to think about things from a physics perspective. My physics prof was able to help with some of it. It was very odd. If I would have stuck with it, would things have improved?
Pi and sigma bonds fall out of thinking of it from a physical/symmetrical/statistical perspective. There's not too much hand waving in the modeling of atomic and molecular orbitals.
Re: Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sigma and Pi bonds are typically covered in AP Chemistry, even if the “why/how” is hand waved pretty heavily. The valence cloud shapes get wild for heavier atoms and bonds between two or more atoms add even more to the mix.
I had incredible difficulties with Chemistry, more than any other subject, because most everything was hand waved away, requiring mostly rote memorization. I could never get an intuitive understanding, partly because my profs seemingly refusing to think about things from a physics perspective. My physics prof was able to help with some of it. It was very odd. If I would have stuck with it, would things have improved?
this was my experience as well. "here's a trend, it's not true in these cases for reasons we won't explain." I only had two semesters and the second was much better than the first.
Re: Einstein's relativity rules chemical bonds in heavy elements, new research shows
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sigma and Pi bonds are typically covered in AP Chemistry, even if the “why/how” is hand waved pretty heavily. The valence cloud shapes get wild for heavier atoms and bonds between two or more atoms add even more to the mix.
I had incredible difficulties with Chemistry, more than any other subject, because most everything was hand waved away, requiring mostly rote memorization. I could never get an intuitive understanding, partly because my profs seemingly refusing to think about things from a physics perspective. My physics prof was able to help with some of it. It was very odd. If I would have stuck with it, would things have improved?
Part of the problem is that the difficulty curve becomes, like, superexponential if you try to do the actual math. Fairly elementary atoms require the full theory of quantum mechanics to justify rigorously, and anything more complicated than that requires huge bodies of specialist knowledge on approximation schemes (I assume; I haven't studied them, but given that helium already requires approximations I'm assuming the trend continues..)
Of course, they could still do a much better job useful providing pointers into this knowledge, instead of just handwaving over it and insisting on rote memorization.