Quantum Mechanics: Schrödinger's discovery of the shape of atoms

preview_player
Показать описание
Ok physics time is over. Time for silly twittering!

General theme
I think it could be useful if I restate the central message of the video here, for clarity:
The shape of hydrogen (and all atoms) is made up by the way the electron spreads itself, as a wave function. This wave function is a blobby shape, and often looks like spheres and donuts put next to one another. The wave function is the electron itself, in a sense. When you don't disturb it, the electron looks like that. When you do disturb it, it becomes a single hard point, and the blobby shape vanishes.

Specific notes and clarifications:
Schrödinger didn't really emphasize the shape of atoms in his discovery, instead everyone considered the big discoveries to be:
1) The Schrödinger equation
2) The total hydrogen wave function
3) The energy levels of hydrogen
But the shape of hydrogen follows immediately from the total hydrogen wave function, and since we want to look at those shapes, I figured I should focus on them in this vid.

At 1:40 I talk about the planetary model of the atom. There were actually two variations of the planetary model, the Rutherford model and the Bohr model. It was the Bohr model that made these 'very nice predictions' I mention, it gave a relation for the energy levels of hydrogen. It couldn't explain where these energy levels were coming from though, it took Schrödinger's discovery of the total hydrogen wave function to explain their origin.
There were also some other atomic models before the planetary model, for instance the cubic model, the Saturnian model and the plum-pudding model. They are now relevant only in a historic sense.

At 2:03 I simplify the discovery of wave-particle duality in electrons a bit. De Broglie was indeed the first to propose it for electrons, but he was building on previous work by Einstein. Einstein had made a formal definition of wave-particle duality in photons (light), and De Broglie was extending it to matter.
The four situations I list are also more of a hindsight-view that justify De Broglie's pitch. They are: Compton scattering between electrons and photons, the photographic-plate part of the double slit experiment, the crystal-grate part of the double slit experiment and electron free-particle behavior.

At 4:13, I draw eight orbitals of hydrogen as an example, but there are more. Strictly speaking there's an infinite amount of orbitals, of which about the first 80 are important for chemistry and physics. I picked these eight to draw simply because they make nice examples of which shapes hydrogen can take.
Many of those 80 orbitals actually look rather alike. Often you'll have several orbitals that have the same shape, just flipped 90°, or with an additional set of small blobs nested within the big blobs.

The spotty picture I draw at 5:38 of the thousand positions of the electron is somewhat simplified. I draw every position inside the three blobs -- but this is not quite correct. The blobs are what are known as "90%-probability surfaces". Basically, you have a 90% chance of finding the electron within these blobs. The remaining 10% of sightings will fall somewhat outside the blobs. Like any wave, the electron wave function decays slowly and stretches out for quite a while. I didn't want to draw these extra 10%, because I thought it would be confusing.
The argument still holds though: There really is an area in between the blobs where you cannot encounter the electron, called a nodal plane.

At 5:44 I refer to the electron's wave function as 'probability wave function'. This is a slip of the tongue on my part, the phrase is either 'probability distribution' or 'wave function'.
There is also a subtle difference between those two phrases, the probability distribution is the absolute squared of the wave function: P = |Ψ|². But, for the purpose of the video, they are both 'blobby shapes'.

The '40 years of heated debate' I mention at 6:09 was about the interpretation of quantum mechanics, and the philosophical implications. Things like teleportation, determinism and statistical randomness were discussed, leading to several different interpretations, the main ones of which were: The Copenhagen interpretation, the Many Worlds interpretation and Realism.
Einstein (who favored Realism) strongly disliked the statistical, random nature of the wave function, and he summed it up in a famous statement: "I, for one, am convinced that God does not throw dice".
His stance was ultimately disproven in a series of experiments that proved Bell's theorem.

Noooo no more room for notes :(, I have the final notes here:
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

At 7:17 this is the longest current YouTube video focusing on Erwin Schrödinger's work that never once mentions boxes of felines and I, for one, thank you for that.

sam
Автор

"...ended up with Einstein saying some very angry things about dice."
Love it!

coachhannah
Автор

I kinda love the fact, that he is doing all the maths instead of just saying that there were some calculations :D

werter
Автор

man, I have a master's degree in electrical engineering, and this is the first time somebody was able to present this knowledge in the way I was searching for in the last 20 years.

igormisic
Автор

I am a teacher. I sincerely hope you are involved in the teaching profession. You strike me as the type of person that was born a teacher. Thank you !

ednorton
Автор

Just watched this video again.  I'm a physicist, and this is a superb overview of QM, the best popular account I've ever seen.  All the complexity is present, but the story is simply told, and beautifully illustrated.  This should be required viewing in high school chemistry and physics courses.

cpanati
Автор

Well done! This is an excellent explanation!

LookingGlassUniverse
Автор

You know you're dealing with serious stuff when the equation contains pitchforks!

krolsky
Автор

I've been searching for weeks on a video that explained the wave/particle duality of matter, and this is the only one that has made any sense at all. The others all use bizarre metaphors or mathematical equations that don't give you a satisfying visual. This video was brief and satisfying in its explanation. Well done!

zachh
Автор

Dude... This is the more human, easy explanation of orbitals ever. And even a bit more. This is high quality content! Many physics teachers should learn from this.

foobar
Автор

Oh my gosh you explained this so well.. I mean of course it's still extremely confusing to wrap my head around, but at least I understand why

smooooth_
Автор

I have been sitting for days and nights, randomly reading and watching videos to understand this. You did it in 7 minutes. Dear Sir, I salute you!

MacLuckyPTP
Автор

I've had an interest in physics for 25 years and this is the first time I've seen someone explain so well and so simply both the shape of atoms, why they are that shape and what Schrodinger had to do with it all.
Well done sir!

TDSM
Автор

Story goes that Schrödinger said during a teaching lesson that electrons follow a wave function.
A student then asked:
"If they follow a wave function, where is the equation?"
In fact, up to that point noone had an equation.
So after the lesson, Schrödinger went home and developped his famous equation which he then presented at the next lesson.
This is what I call genius! 🤯

hg
Автор

A tour de force! The clearest, most illustrative, most entertaining explanation of these concepts on the WEB, bar none. I subscribed to your channel solely on the basis of this video. I've watched it over and over not because the ideas don't sink in but because it is so enjoyable.

vector
Автор

You can find a lot about quantum mechanics on the internet. A lot of crap. But this little flick is in fact a precious perl for understanding.

MartinusRex
Автор

That drawing of Heisenberg looks way too confident.

storminmormin
Автор

Hey mate can you please continue to make videos, 'cause this is absolutely amazing!!

mojthabayaqobi
Автор

I sincerely hope you return to do more of these. This is the best and most entertaining explanation I have seen on this topic. I have shared this with my 13 year old son and he was astounded and it really has helped him at school.

SciPhi
Автор

Good explanation! No BS, no liquid, just bare minimal well-explained. Hats off!

semplar