how does the quantum mechanics model decribe an electrons location
200012
It describes electron location in terms of probabilities.  The energy levels around a nucleus are not well-defined orbitals.  Rather, they are regions of space where an electron may be found.  Withing the orbitals, the electron's precise location can not be known.  According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, the more accurately we measure an electron's location, the more imprecise the measurement of its velocity becomes, and vice-versa.\n\nSo, the best description of an electron's location is that of an "electron cloud", which represents the region in space where an electron has the highest probability of being.
411065
it's basically a system to put electrons in an atom and although they are arbitrarily placed, the place where they are more likely to be is called atomic orbital. there are several of these. \nthe first, called s orbital, will only acommodate 2 electrons, the second, called p orbital, 8 electrons and so on. read more on the source link
663907
Your question, although it sounds absurd, probably has some research you could find on the topic. It is amazing how theoretical the major branches of science, which actively rely on theory assumed to be true in every day application, still are. I'd apply my brain to it but I gave up this particular line of thinking (which brings up the point to place here why I'm posting) after reading a Linus Pauling book section several years ago where he begins to introduce the "idea" of distal electrons taking up spaces on atoms and molecules locally, yet the bond slots they should be in are locally empty. The basic gist was, nobody knows if its true (mainly because they can't prove it) however, effects observed locally can't be explained without excepting the theory that an electron billions of light years away can be attached to a local, apparently empty electron bond slot.
90987
Both. Electrons and photons behave similarly. Even protons and neutrons are subject to that intensity distribution - but only so long as you don't force a collapse of the wave function (i.e. observe their path, thus making the wave function real).
475949
There isn't a definite boundary line.  A molecule of several atoms can exhibit quantum-mechanical behavior under appropriate experimental conditions.  Of course, the heavier the molecule, the more it obeys classical mechanics as opposed to quantum mechanics.  The "correspondence principle" tells us that at a large enough scale, all processes show classical behavior.
484276
It depends on what substance you're talking about as well as many other factors. In Quantum Mechanics, the observation of particles affects the observers ability to measure certain properties. For example: you can know the velocity of a particle, but you can't know it's position; or you can know it's position, but not it's velocity. It's like trying to find out where a grain of sand is by throwing other grains of sand at it. Once you find out where it is, it's been moved. It's also like trying to find an answer to the question of whether or not a tree falling in a forest makes a sound if nobody is there to hear it. Paradoxically, the only way to find out is to be there and hear it.
503812
You apparently know what the diagonal rule looks like, but the link below gives a quite nice picture of it.\n\nBasically it is a summary of the order in which electron shells will be filled up. Follow the arrows round to discover where the electrons will go, starting at the 1s level.\n\nSo for 15:\n2 electrons will go into 1s, filling that up\n1s2\nthe next electrons will go into 2s2, 2p6, 3s2 and then the remaining 3 electrons into the 3p orbital, giving us a structure of:\n1s2 2s2 2p6 3s2 3p3\nRemeber, on your diagram, the first two characters (2p, 4d etc) are the names of the orbital, and the final digit is the number of electrons in that orbital. On your diagram the final digit shows the maximum number of electrons on the orbital; when you write out the structure the first few orbitals will be full (1s2 2s2 2p6 3s2) and the last one will be part full of however many electrons you have left (3p3.)
341373
Quantum mechanics is fascinating, as Einstein's famous quote that "God does not play dice with the universe" is turned on its head.  The random nature associated with the inner workings of atoms and quarks is astonishing when one considers that despite all of the unpredictability of subatomic activity, things in the macroscopic world follow predictable patterns that seem to defy common sense.
235557
Its either d or e. It should be a deshielding effect by the pi electrons. There is some gobbledy-gook showing up in my browser so I can't tell d or e is the pi symbol.
168001
It's an interesting idea, but subatomic particles that do not have electrons are also affected by time dilation (cosmic rays for instance).  And electrons do not literally spin around a nucleus (as far as we can tell) there is a potential for it to be anywhere in a give shell at any given time.
401037
Here's a great and simple explaination from Wikiopedia: \n\nIn atomic physics and quantum chemistry, the electron configuration is the arrangement of electrons in an atom, molecule, or other physical structure (eg, a crystal).\n\nLike other elementary particles, the electron is subject to the laws of quantum mechanics, and exhibits both particle-like and wave-like properties. Formally, the quantum state of a particular electron is defined by its wavefunction, a complex-valued function of space and time. According to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, a particular electron is both "nowhere at all" and "everywhere all at once" until an act of measurement causes it to be detected. The probability that the act of measurement will detect the electron at a particular point in space is proportional to the square of the absolute value of the wavefunction at that point.\n\nElectrons are able to jump from one energy level to another by emission or absorption of a quantum of energy, in the form of a photon. Because of the Pauli exclusion principle, no more than two electrons may exist in a given atomic orbital; therefore an electron may only leap to another orbital if there is a vacancy there.\n\nKnowledge of the electron configuration of different atoms helps us understand the structure of the periodic table of elements. The concept is also useful for describing the chemical bonds that hold molecules together. And in a macro sense this same idea helps explain the peculiar properties of lasers and semiconductors\n\n\nThe other links are also good sources for review and expaination\n\nGood luck
362975
Bohr's theory states that each level that the electron of hydrogen can be promoted to from the ground state are of specific energy (ie the are quantized). When an electron moves between these levels, it either absorbs or emits energy that corresponds to the energy level that the electron is moving to. The spectral lines you are talking about are the emitted radiation caused by electrons that are moving back to the ground state. They can be used to work out how much energy the levels have.
31100
people have this picture in their head of what an atomic electron is like - it's a little ball and it whizzes around the nucleus really fast.  but it's not really like that.  \n\nyou have to divorce from your mind the notion that the electron has a single, fixed, localized position.  instead the electron is "spread out" over space, like a big smear in three dimensions.  a lot of chemistry teachers like to fudge this bit by saying that the electron spends "more time" in areas with higher electron-cloud density, but that's not really correct.  if it were, i could see where your confusion might come from - if it was spending some time on one side of the nucleus, it must spend some time getting back to the other side.\n\nthe truth is, in quantum mechanics an electron is "delocalized".  this means that it has no real, fixed position - instead it is spread out over a region or regions of space, and in fact those regions of space need not be connected.  the electron is quite literally in both places at once, not in one place or the other.\n\nthis is a rather small effect in atomic electrons, but if you consider a conducting metal like copper, the "free electrons" that carry electricity are extremely delocalized.  every single electron is basically spread out over the entire piece of copper.  it's kind of hard to picture, but that's why quantum mechanics is hard.\n\nhope this helps.  feel free to email if you'd like to discussit more.
1477
You always want to place the formal charges in the places they will spend the most time--hence, the formal charges are what you'd draw up first, based generally on the electronegativity and stability of the place.  The resonance structures are just to give you an idea as to where the electrons might wander over to.\n\nTechnically, all the Lewis structures are just to help you understand the charges.  In reality, the elecetrons are constantly moving about, with their locations only localized by a probabilistic model.  The formal charges are indicative of the highest probability that a given electron will be found, while the resonance structures are the less probable locations to find the electron.
646594
There is a problem in quantum mechanics known as the "measurement" problem. Quantum mechanics shows us that particles only have a chance of being found within a certain region, they don't have a definite location.\n\nThe problem is that we have absolutely NO idea how the particles "decide" where to be when we measure them. There have been alot of serious proposals for a solution, but no one is sure.\n\nOne solution is termed the "Manyworlds" scenario, in which a particle is found at -every- location, in an infinite number of "parallel" universes.\n\nSince quantum mechanical effects started taking place as soon as matter was formed (an unimaginably small fraction of a second after the big bang), the Manyworlds theory suggests that since then, and infinite number of alternate universes have been and continue to be formed at every moment in time.
431534
under quantum mechanics...\nit's a thought experiment, called the EPR paradox...\nthis paradox is more severe or seious than schroedinger's cat paradox...\n\nquantum mechanics says that a motion of a particle can be deermined by its wave function, thus the results of an experiment or probabilities or predictions...\n\nbut E, P and R thought that this is true only with statistical distributions of the particles tested by the experiment (the properties of particles)...
297417
You're question seems a bit confused, but I'll try to answer what I see you as asking. First, if the Pauli principle doesn't hold, the particles are Bosons. This means that they will tend to congregate in the same state, subject to the requirments of statistical mechanics (temperature is relevant).\n\nNext, the classical equilibrium will correspond to a range of quantum states. These will be populated to various degrees. The distribution will be determined by Bose-Einstein statistics. Any *other* distribution of states will be a non-equilibrium situation. So, no, the system is not always in equilibrium. The fact that the particles are indistinguisable individually doesn't mean that they are in the same state.