Is there a similarity between internal structure of an atom and solar system?
472253
Not really.  There is a mass at the center, and smaller things 'orbiting', but the similarities are beaten out by the differences.  Unlike planets, the electrons are all the same mass, and much larger compared to the central mass than planets are to the sun.  Also they do not really orbit all in the same plane in the same way that planets do, some of the orbits are ring- shaped, some are like figure 8's and others are sort a 4-lobed pyramid deal.  Plus they are not really solid objects like planets.  The present thinking, for the past 100 years or so, has the electron's orbit as more like a sort of charged cloud with the actual 'presence' of the electron itself at any one place described by a probability rather than being able to say it has a definite location.\n\nAlso, the forces in play are quite different.  The planets whirl around in the grip of gravity, and it is pretty strong but it is still by far the weakest of the forces that can interact with matter.  The forces that act only upon subatomic particles are very different in nature and far more powerful than gravity.\n\nI'd say the similarities are there, like the similarity between certain small dogs and a cat.  But the differences are fundamental.
13297
Atoms have a nucleus ( composed of protons and neutrons) and a cloud of electrons. The number of the different components varies between different elements.\n\nElectrons can only have specific energy levels in an atom - that is the energy is not continious but quantized. This is different from, say, the solar system, because a planet could theoretically be in any orbit. But we know from quantum mechanics (and many, many experiments) that electons can only occupy certain "orbits."\n\nSometimes an electron can be bumped into a higher orbit (the higher orbits have less energy, because they are not as tightly bound) or kicked out of the atom altogether. If a second electron moves into the spot it will release energy as it falls into that level.\n\nHydrogen is the easiest element to study. The nucleus is a single proton, and it can have only one electron. The different energy levels can be illustrated like this:\nhttp://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hyde.html#c2\n(though in reality electrons don't travel on nice orbits)\n\nIf an electron in the second lowest level does a "quantum leap" to the very lowest, it will emit energy - light - at a very specific frequency. In this case 656 nanometers, which is red. If, on the other hand, an electron falls from the 3rd level down to the 1st level the emitted light is blue.\n\nA "spectrum" will show all of these distinct levels, with the brighter ones being the most common. This shows the spectrum of hydrogen with a diagram of the quantum leaps:\nhttp://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hyde.html#c4\n\nIn other atoms it becomes more complex, not every jump is allowed, and in the precense of a magnetic field a "fine structure" is seen in the spectrum, as some of the main lines look double.\n\nThe result of all of this is that each different atom will give a different characteristic spectrum. So, you can use this to identify different elements in anything from crime scene samples to distant galaxies.
514532
We are all related.  You will see scientists, who mainly believe in the big bang theory, will often describe us as "stardust".  The reason for this is that when planetary nebula are being created, and a star results, the leftover matter from the new star is what planets condense from.  They are made of the same basic materials.  \n\nIn addition, every basic element on the periodic table from hydrogen to iron (including carbon; e.g. "carbon-based life forms" such as us) is naturally produced inside the sun, and every larger element can be produced from the same basic ingredients by other processes.  \n\nIt is no coincidence that we (and everything else) are made of the same elements as the rest of the solar system and much of the universe.
298477
neutrons\n\nIsotopes have to have the same numbers of protons\nor they'd be different elements.  Since the\nelectrons match up with the protons, the electron\ncount is consistent too.
147445
Its all relative..usually we use sun as a point of a reference when we talk about relative size of planets which circle it. Pluto is about the same size as mercury.
902950
Basically the same as the model of the hydrogen atom, but with more of everything!\nEach of the electrons follows it's own path, which are all perfectly circular orbits and are arranged so as to have the maximum distance between orbits possible. I'm not sure about the energy levels, or if the orbits all have the same radius...
1032403
No because an atom is only a single element and thus such a "universe" would have no chemical composition except for the single atom it would have been made from
141708
Yes. It's actually in our own solar system.  Whether it is a planet or not is the real question.  It is really small.  While bigger than pluto, it is still smaller than the Earth's moon!
815589
it is very simple, the shells, subshells actually represent energy levels in the atoms. it is just like big building having different storeys and them again the rooms. You can compare storeys as shells, and individual apartments as subshells and the rooms in each apartment as orbitals where we the electrons are revolving
188040
Absolutely.\n\nIt is now thought (and even more radio telescope survey evidence on this has just come in) that at the very beginning of things (the Big Bang) there was nothing but energy. As the Universe expanded and cooled, elementary particles were formed from that energy, and some time later, things cooled enough for atoms to form and stay together. Since it takes force to push protons together (to form nuclei of the higher atomic number atoms), and the force wasn't available, only hydrogen (and a very small amount of helium and perhaps an even smaller amount of lithium -- the simplest atoms) resulted.\n\nLots of hydrogen, distributed in a sort of clumpy manner, will eventually collapse into stars. Large stars burn through their available fuel relatively quickly, all the while forcing together protons into more complex atoms such as carbon and oxygen and silicon, and so on. When these large stars go nova, they spray a good part of themselves into interstellar space where the material is incorporated into newly forming stars or collected into clouds around them. As those clouds collapse into planets (which must be very common as we have now seen some hundreds of them around stars in the local area in our galaxy (ie, within a few hundred light years)), the non-hydrogen material in them is actually star stuff. Probably not really dust particles in most cases, but...\n\nAnd that's how it was. Fascinating stuff.
1072113
It has been stated that the sun has a great deal of hydrogen within it due to the necessity of it being converted into helium, and the energy difference generating its heat potential.  There is a problem with this concept.  Although there is energy release in the conversion of hydrogen to helium, the interior of our sun is not what has been taught in your school.\n\nWere you to determine the acceleration value of a mass 400 miles from the very center of our sun, you would find that were a mass to be released in this location, it would accelerate to a speed greater than that of light in one second.  This means there is not a continual atomic furnace generating heat by the process of hydrogen to helium as taught.  Either there is a hollow area within our sun where mass cannot exist, or there is a new form of mass unknown to mankind.  Offhand I would reject the last.\n\nThe reason helium and/or oxygen could not burn within our sun is that the pressure surrounding the gases is too great.  Notice when you burn a piece of paper how the smoke spreads outward along with the heat energy.  Within the sun the heat energy is already beyond that of what we would experience on our planet.  There is nothing to change.
743218
There are some things that we c an all agree on. There is a numbered amount of materials in the universe, we are all made of the same chemicals/compounds/metals etc. We can also agree that at a lower level (atomic/subatomic) everything in the universe is made of the same few things (atoms/electron/quarks/strings etc.), so my question becomes this. What force guides matter at the subatomic level. What tells this group of atoms to form a diamond molecule and the other to form water, or a feather. What tells the atomic structure of rubber to bounce and concrete to, well, to NOT!\n\nTo me, to deny the idea of intelligent design is much more of a leap than to accept the obvious, evident truth all around us that although chaos exists all around us, if you look deep enough there is most definitely order and intelligence in the universe. God may not be the man in the Bible but God most definitely rules the universe at the atomic level.....so, no, similarities between species means nothing more than that, similarities....
29638
The internal structure of an atom (in terms of its protons and neutrons) will create regions which are called orbitals.  We commonly think of atoms according to the Bohr model, where electrons orbit the nucleus like little planets.  This model is wrong.  the truth is that we can only determine the location of an electron based on a statistical model, and that gives us regions where electrons are more likely or less likely to be found if we searched for them there.  These areas where electrons are most likely to be found are called orbitals.\n\nThe orbitals differ in energy states.  An electron in a high orbital needs high energy, and electrons with less energy will be at lower orbitals.  When the number of electrons and protons are equal (ie the atom is not an ion) and the electrons occupy all of the lowest energy orbitals possible, that is called the ground state.\n\nif an electron at the ground state gets extra energy, it can jump to a higher orbital.  However, the various orbitals require certain, specific amounts of energy, and the energy gaps between the orbitals are specific amounts of energy, based on the orbital structure dictated by the nucleus (the details of all of this require some of the ugliest differential equations and eigenfunctions you're likely to ever see).  So the energy absorbed by an electron to jump from a low orbital to a high orbital must be of a specific amount.  After time, the electron will eventually relax back to the lower orbital.  When it does, it will release its excess energy in the form of a photon with the precise amount of energy that spearates the two orbitals.\n\nFor a given atom, there is a certain number of specific orbital transitions possible, and each possible transition will correspnd to a single band on the spectrum produced by the pure element when heated to.  So while a given atom can give several colors, the number of colors it can give are limited.
803143
In atomic physics, the Bohr model depicts the atom as a small, positively charged nucleus surrounded by waves of electrons in orbit — similar in structure to the solar system, but with electrostatic forces providing attraction, rather than gravity, and with waves spread over entire orbits instead of localized planets.
676079
Similarities:\nBoth gets its light from the Sun.\nBoth revolves around the Sun.\nBoth are in the Solar System\nBoth are in the Milky Way\nBoth have moons\n\nDifferences:\nEarth is bigger than Mars\nMars have two moons, Earth has one\nMars takes 1.88 years to go around the Sun\nEarth has a great diversity of life\nMars' gravity is 1/3 of Earth's
687358
Similarities: All S-orbitals are spherical.  Any given molecule has only a single 1s orbital, and a single 2s orbital.\n\nDifferences: S-orbitals grow more complex as you go up to higher levels.  The 1s orbital has no spherical node, while the 2s orbital has 1 spherical node.
48465
Of the atom?  Neils Bohr believed (like Rutherford) that an atom was composed of a nucleus, having a positive charge being circled by negative electrons, much like a solar system.  His model includes the ability of an excited electron to quantum jump to a high energy level and then emit radiation as it returns to its regular state.