E = ?

Originally posted by FreeMason:

"Well, the "h" in h/2 that's the hamiltonian opperator right? I need to look such things up. But the Energy of an electron in an Orbital that would be based on what quantum level it is at?"

actually, i think the 'h' in that equation represents Planck's constant (apologies if that's spelt wrong) or 'h-bar', which is Planck's constant devided by 2 pi. TN1, please feel free to clarify.

"I'm beginning to think, that since we can not determine where an electron is precisely anyways...that it does not orbit the atom even in the way now thought of...."

well, you're right, in that electrons can't truly be described in that way, and that the orbital model isn't how we now think of electrons. having said that, the orbital model is still used a lot, a hell of a lot, because it is usually sufficient.

- qo.

No qo I know h is planck's constant. But I distincly remember the hamiltonian operator (an h with a funny upward slanted line in the neck ) being used, and I feel that it was used for this equation no?

Or do you know for fact it is the plancks constant. I don't think it is because that is a number, and therefore it can not change. Half of planck's constant would just be some other constant if it were used for such things.

I'm just too lazy to look it up, and hoped someone else would do it for me, now I go to bed, and I'll have my answer in the evening, since it is the morning

Yes the orbital model is sufficient for seeing the shapes of molecules and such, which is most important. But I just think it would be interesting to figure out exactly what that little electron is doing the whole time

Wait...I did decide to look it up, and because it is important, I'll leave what I previously wrote.

I felt something was funny about h/2 it wasn't the hamiltonian operator that is H with a ^ above it, it is the same discription the h with a / in it...but it simply means h/2(pi) therefore the uncertainty principle is h/2(pi)/2 or what...h/4(pi)???

anyways...think about it sleepy time

Sincerely,
no signature

Originally posted by FreeMason:

"I'm just too lazy to look it up, and hoped someone else would do it for me, now I go to bed, and I'll have my answer in the evening, since it is the morning "

i also can't be bothered to look it up. work is closing down for the xmas holidays, and i'm damned if i'm going to start routing around in my books now.

"Yes the orbital model is sufficient for seeing the shapes of molecules and such, which is most important. But I just think it would be interesting to figure out exactly what that little electron is doing the whole time "

my point was that we pretty much can. check out the envelope wavefunction model. um ... looks for Ben Daniel Duke model, er ... check out the works of Gerald (could be Gerard?) Bastard. i kid you not. the electron's wavefunction describes the probability of it being anywhere at any give time interval. its the best we've got.

"I felt something was funny about h/2 it wasn't the hamiltonian operator that is H with a ^ above it, it is the same discription the h with a / in it...but it simply means h/2(pi) therefore the uncertainty principle is h/2(pi)/2 or what...h/4(pi)???"

so .... i think you're saying that you agree that 'h' is NOT the hamiltonian? of course, TN1 could just clear this whole mess up ....

- qo.

h is the Planck's constant.....The Hamiltonian operator is something much different and has nothing to do with the h..Well when we say hamiltonian energy we actually mean the total energy of a particle in a square well potential for emample..That means the sum of the kinetic and potential energy.An example of operators is the momentum operator ihd/dx,,i think ...I can not remember all the signs ,because i am not reading from a book ,it happens to have a good memory and quantum mechanics is one of my favourite subjects....The operator can operate in a wave function of an electron ,for example an electron orbiting around a nucleus with Y(x)=exp(-ikx)........Quit one can i have your ideas about barrier penetration ,since there is a probability of a particle penetrate a barrier ,once might be thinking that a ball can penetrate a wall ...Well it might happen ,but with a very small probability!!!

E=mc^2

E=(0.5)mc^2 for kinetic energy

Ok, here's another problem with your math...

if you want to use the second equation, you'll have to mulitiple the left side by (0.5) as well. Kinetic energy =1/2 mv^2, I agree
=K.E. + P.E.=total energy
where P.E.=mgh or mvh

Other variables can be substituted in for the variables listed, but in the end, you aren't actually understand the truth of the relationship of E=mc^2

Mass can be formed by energy and energy formed by breaking up (or creating stable) mass. This works in a lab and it works for the A-Bomb and H-Bomb. I would say that is a good indicator of its truth.