Erwin Schrodinger and Werner Heisenburg
Schrodinger and Heisenberg
The idea of the path of an electron being unpredictable was presented by Werner Heisenberg. It was "packaged" as "Heisenberg's uncertainty principle" and that's how we know it today. What Heisenberg actually said was that if we look at an electron, the closer we look at its momentum, the less certain we are about its position. And if we look closely at its position, the less certain we can be about its momentum. There is a trade-off when we look for precision, and we cannot have our cake and eat it too. It's one or the other as regards accuracy.
Orbitals. Not to be confused with orbits. They don't actually move in 'paths' either. Due to their nature, you cannot determine the exact location of an electron and still know where it will be next. (See "Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle") Orbitals actually are mathematical functions which describe the probability of finding an electron in a given space.
It doesn't make a lot of sense to talk about an electron's path, because electrons in atoms don't have paths period, whether circular, elliptical, or banana-shaped. They have orbitals, which despite the similarity in sound are not at all the same thing as orbits.
As many paths as there are branches in the circuit
Schrodinger and Heisenberg
Kevin Lopez
Schrodinger and Heisenberg state that electrons cannot be predicted in 1927. It was stated that the more precisely the position of some particles are determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known.
no. the current theory is that the electrons move randomly in the outer most part of a molecule in part called the "electron cloud" which is just swirling mass of electrons with no predictable path
Erwin Schrodinger and Werner Heisenburg
The idea of the path of an electron being unpredictable was presented by Werner Heisenberg. It was "packaged" as "Heisenberg's uncertainty principle" and that's how we know it today. What Heisenberg actually said was that if we look at an electron, the closer we look at its momentum, the less certain we are about its position. And if we look closely at its position, the less certain we can be about its momentum. There is a trade-off when we look for precision, and we cannot have our cake and eat it too. It's one or the other as regards accuracy.
Comets are falling rocks, whose paths can be calculated quite precisely.
Yes the paths make the atom easier to read than having to draw electrons all over the atom model
they are tracked by the weather satellites and radars
oval in shape.
Orbitals. Not to be confused with orbits. They don't actually move in 'paths' either. Due to their nature, you cannot determine the exact location of an electron and still know where it will be next. (See "Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle") Orbitals actually are mathematical functions which describe the probability of finding an electron in a given space.
Kepler discovered that the planets orbit the sun in oval shaped paths called ellipses.