The distances between the nucleus and electrons in atoms, if the nucleus was the sun and electrons were the planets, would be way further apart than planets are the sun. So, while atoms are very tiny, the scales are pretty extreme.
E = MC^2 that just describes the relationship between Energy and the “Rest Mass” of something, which is to say there is a lot of energy contained within the mass of something.
The distances between the nucleus and electrons in atoms, if the nucleus was the sun and electrons were the planets, would be way further apart than planets are the sun. So, while atoms are very tiny, the scales are pretty extreme.
E = MC^2 that just describes the relationship between Energy and the “Rest Mass” of something, which is to say there is a lot of energy contained within the mass of something.
The distances between the nucleus and electrons in atoms, if the nucleus was the sun and electrons were the planets, would be way further apart than planets are the sun. So, while atoms are very tiny, the scales are pretty extreme.
E = MC^2 that just describes the relationship between Energy and the “Rest Mass” of something, which is to say there is a lot of energy contained within the mass of something.
[Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/c19wx/proportionally_are_the_distances_between_stars/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) is what my quick response is for the “distance…”
No if we scale the planets to the size of an electron they will be very distant from each other, about 0.4inch. While in reality they are 3.937 × 10^-9 that’s more than 100.000 smaller.
E=MC^2 is to calculate how much energy an “X” thing has, it has nothing to do with the distance between point A and point B.
[Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/c19wx/proportionally_are_the_distances_between_stars/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) is what my quick response is for the “distance…”
No if we scale the planets to the size of an electron they will be very distant from each other, about 0.4inch. While in reality they are 3.937 × 10^-9 that’s more than 100.000 smaller.
E=MC^2 is to calculate how much energy an “X” thing has, it has nothing to do with the distance between point A and point B.
[Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/c19wx/proportionally_are_the_distances_between_stars/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) is what my quick response is for the “distance…”
No if we scale the planets to the size of an electron they will be very distant from each other, about 0.4inch. While in reality they are 3.937 × 10^-9 that’s more than 100.000 smaller.
E=MC^2 is to calculate how much energy an “X” thing has, it has nothing to do with the distance between point A and point B.
This isn’t exact, but… If an atom was the size of a soccer stadium, the nucleas would be the size of a pea. Scaling our solar system that way would make the sun about the size of a golf ball.
The sizes are for different reasons. The planets are just condensed matter that had enough inertia to keep missing the sun. Their speed determines their stable orbit. They can be at any distance and inference can send them into the sun or out of the solar system
Electrons are actively moving around at discrete energy levels and can easily be moved up to the next discreet level then fall back down by releasing a photon. They can be forced of an atom and make it an ion, they can be forced into interacting with the proton, or they can be shared between more than one atom.
Latest Answers