Editing 2734: Electron Color
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
This is a relevant question for a kid to ask since on many scientific diagrams of atoms, the subatomic particles have been assigned colors to identify them for the reader. Neutrons are generally red, green, or gray; protons red or green and electrons might be blue or yellow. But there is no accepted rule for coloring such diagrams, so the kid may be confused. Additionally, some scientific diagrams use color coding rather than actually representative colors, and the kid may be wondering what color particles actually are. | This is a relevant question for a kid to ask since on many scientific diagrams of atoms, the subatomic particles have been assigned colors to identify them for the reader. Neutrons are generally red, green, or gray; protons red or green and electrons might be blue or yellow. But there is no accepted rule for coloring such diagrams, so the kid may be confused. Additionally, some scientific diagrams use color coding rather than actually representative colors, and the kid may be wondering what color particles actually are. | ||
| β | In completely off-character style, Miss Lenhart actually gives a correct fact ''...so "color" isn't even defined for them.'' and states that, unlike the diagrams, which are colored for convenience, the particles are not colored. She however gives a bogus, pseudoscientific explanation: ''They're too small to interact with visible light, ...'' In fact, every optical effect in our world is due to electrons interacting with light. That leads to | + | In completely off-character style, Miss Lenhart actually gives a correct fact ''...so "color" isn't even defined for them.'' and states that, unlike the diagrams, which are colored for convenience, the particles are not colored. She however gives a bogus, pseudoscientific explanation: ''They're too small to interact with visible light, ...'' In fact, every optical effect in our world is due to electrons interacting with light. That leads to colour because the electrons are usually bound to various atomic nuclei in molecules etc., which leads to differences in how they take up and give out various energies of photon. But the electron itself does not have a particular hue that can be shone upon and absorbed/reflected, it merely governs the possible quanta of energy changes involved in generating the broad spectrum of light that the substance formed of the atom(s) may be seen by. Also protons are far "bigger" than electrons (and would interact strongly!), but their interaction with light (and generally electromagnetic radiation) is rarely observable, because they are shielded by the tiny electrons in ordinary matter. So, whether intended or not, Miss Lenhart is in her usual role of talking bullshit, also see for instance [[1519: Venus]]. |
She then continues by saying that electrons are definitely yellow. The reason for this isn't clear. She may be: | She then continues by saying that electrons are definitely yellow. The reason for this isn't clear. She may be: | ||
