This is what the Hydrogen Atom REALLY looks like!

Implementing the exact diagonalization method for a potential V=-k/r in 3D.
The solutions to the Schrödinger equations are the typical images of the Hydrogen Orbitals.
The isosurfaces represent the probability density associated to the Wave Function of the electron in this potential and the red and blue colors represent the sign of the Wave Function.

00:00 n=2
00:08 n=3
00:27 n=4
00:58 Animation 1
01:20 Animation 2
#3d #schrodingerequation #orbital #matlabsimulation

[YourPhysicsSimulator]

I know that these videos don't have the best image quality... With the compression of my editor and YT its quality decreases a bit.
When I have time to learn how to install and use a better editor I'll use that.

Thanks for watching!

[TAThor]

Very cool illustration! Thank you for sharing.

[Asterism_Desmos]

I will be watching these now :) just subscribed.

[Kevin-]

Ya que seguís canales en español, de dónde sos?
Lo que haces está buenísimo, aunque estudié mates, algunas cosas de física las entiende, otras casi nada; me encantó cruzarme con tu canal en recomendados :D

[chedagoz]

What are you working on now? I'm a physicist and also a software engineer. Maybe we could make some collaboration in the future.

[anxiouslycalm]

Can someone please explain me what the blue and red parts represent?

[ANGROCEL]

I thought Hydrogen was a 1S Orbital with 1 e-? I see p's, d's, f's, and all sorts of other Orbitals.

[seanehle]

The video title is purely misleading.
This is what the probability of finding the electron of a hydrogen atom looks like in the frame connected to the center of mass of the proton-electron system. It is emphatically not what the atom looks like, nor is it the "shape" of the atom. It is a probability distribution of potential answers the universe would give if asked, "where is the electron in that atom in this reference frame?"
Over-stating the conclusions of QM is a difficult thing to avoid, but it serves us well to keep in mind what the math is actually saying, without adding human interpretations that make it seem like more than it is.
Answering the question, "Where will a thing be *if* I look for it?" is not the same as asking, "Where is the thing when I'm not looking for it?"