Atomic Universe
Nearly every student of science has noticed the remarkable similarities between the classroom model of the atom and what we call a Solar System. The atom’s nucleus is analogous to the Sun, while the revolving electrons resemble the planets in their various orbits.
I think it is not futile to attempt a correlation between the two different aspects of everything that is. At one end, we have the entire vastness of the unfathomable universe (or even beyond). On the other end, the miniscule fuzzy constituents of everything that we know and see. So close, yet so far.
Modern versions of the atomic structure are quite complex. The electron is known to notoriously slip past observation. Heisenberg’s Uncertainity Principle tracks this electronic behaviour. It states that it is impossible to determine precisely both the position as well as the velocity (momentum) of the electron at any moment.
So we can imagine the atom as a bunch of frivolous particles waving their way about the nucleus, in a highly unpredictable fashion. Now zoom out x1020. There, do you see the Solar System yet?
To relate the two — the atom and the solar system — allow me to establish a connection. Time. I imagine the time scales will be different for both the worlds. What’s one second on the atomic scale, could measure up to 100 million years on the universal scale of things. This is essential for comparisons. At any moment, the snapshot of the atom will be identical to the solar system. However, unlike the latter, the atom’s orbiting electrons are always behaving errantly. It is difficult to theoretically predict their exact position without practically trying to measure it (it is also pointless, but that’s not relevant here).
Hence it is crucial to factor in the time scaling. Over a 100 million years, dozens of planets will get sucked in, asteroids created and destroyed, and countless comets will zoom past the sun. Shrink this convoluted behaviour into a second’s duration, and it becomes clear how electrons are so unpredictable. I am relating the electrons to all: the planets, the asteroids and the comets. Electron-comets and electron-meteors push electron-planets out of orbit, electron-asteroids move in strange orbits; the sum total is a vexed up cloud of electrons whose position at one moment is subject to great uncertainity.
Developing on this relation, a molecule of atoms is analogous to an entire galaxy, or part of it. Each solar system (each sun and its orbiting bodies) are equivalent of atoms. Extending further, the whole universe could be just a collection of molecules and compounds on a “higher level,” possibly a heated gas that’s expanding.
The universe forms the “atoms” of a higher level universe. Similarly, the atoms form a “universe” for a lower level world. In one of the electron-planets of an atom in the air we breathe, could be life similar to ours – replete with its own atoms, molecules and ice cream sticks. This “leveling” could go on infinitely in both directions.
Chief opponents of this theory could be facts such as the varying sizes and states of the sun, as opposed to the stability of non-radioactive nuclei. Considering the theory true, this could shed more light on the workings at the molecular level. As a major portion of a star’s life is spent in stable state, so does an atom’s nucleus. And at times of instability, atoms may get rapidly destroyed (converted into white dwarf or quasar equivalents), only to be replaced by newly formed atoms (manifestations of the nebulae on the atomic level).
Another counter could be the opposite nature of the solely-attractive gravitational forces for the cosmic level, and the repulsive electrostatic forces. However, the nuclear forces more or less compensate for that.
It seems all research in the world of atoms is a rediscovery of the same phenomena we observe on the universal scale, albeit from a different perspective. This perspective is different due to the difference in dimensions, and the difference in apparent time scales. One should definitely ponder over the possibility of this current theory, trying to associate discoveries from both sides of the spectrum to find connections.
there are numerous things happening at atomic level which are needed to be considered.
firstly, protons and neutrons also exist inside a nucleus. what will be the analogy for that on universal scale? since electrons are planet, sun is the nucleus ,protons are ….. ?? , neutrons are ….. ??
secondly, varying size of planets as opposed to electrons.
thirdly, antielectrons alias positrons also exist. the reaction which leads to there production is p -> n + (e+) + v(neutrino). since the early universe was mostly hydrogen (i.e. protons) this reaction lead to the prod. of neutrons.
and
finally
when r u coming back??
To compare the atomic scale to the astronomic scale, as I said, requires some radical thinking. This is because our approach is quite different when exploring these areas.
I suggest looking at the neutrons and protons as the cosmic radiations from the sun. As long as they are within the sun, they hold no unique identity (they are a single solid star body). But an escaping nucleon could be viewed as the solar flare.
Thinking of particles (the fermions in the atomic level) as equivalent to waves (the cosmic radiations in space) opens up new ideas. Nebulae, asteroid belts and other such phenomenon give semblance to entangling of electrons, radioactivity, fission, fusion etc.
There are “anti” particles in space too. A black hole is the polar opposite of a stable star, for instance.
I’m returning on July 12.
[...] in this exercise, for instance). As a bonus, this also provides some sort of validation for the Atomic Universe theory, showing the presence of the same calculable properties in the astronomic level, as that on [...]
The Uncertainity Principle « Prevalencia said this on July 4, 2009 at 23:31 |
?????
i am currently writing a paper on this very subject, if you would like to bounce some ideas off me it would be appreciated. weatherit.storm@gmail.com