I thought I would try this out. All the videos that I saw have been interesting. I don't have much going on, but sometimes I talk too much anyway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYMOne3asTwI can't seem to make it work right
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a6af0/a6af0253fc47f52f9e58caa950ec8811f1975586" alt="Confused :?"
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wYMOne3asTw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Oh, well, maybe I'll try again later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYMOne3asTw[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYMOne3asTw[/youtube]
YES!! !! ! Finally figured it out! Sorry I kind of rambled. I love science and am intrigued by atoms and sub atomic particles. It is really hard for me to communicate my thoughts as I speak, it is much easier in writing. And it always seems that my kids need something, in the vid my baby bumped her head, she was fine
Don't bother to read the rest of this if you don't like science. (I could have found a better place to talk about this but it sort of is a part of who I am.)
I wanted to edit this one last time to clarify my theory on proton placement (not that most people care!) If electron charge repels other electrons and yet is attracted to protons in the nucleus this is directly correlated to the statistical placement of orbitals and distance from protons. My theory is that the proton placement is directly affected by electrons, taking into consideration wave/particle properties and interaction among all other leptons and interference of surrounding particles. Combine this with the up/down quark configuration and interaction of gluons in protons and neutrons. The way I see it the proton, neutron configuration of the nucleus would place the protons with its down quark at -1/3 e facing away from the nearest or interacting electron, this would sit nicely along side of a neutrons +2/3e up quark creating a nearly neutral zone. The issue becomes the left over (now un-used) +1/3 of a +2/3 e up quark in the proton (or neutron, which ever up quark you picture best), which it would be reasonable to think this is what keeps the interacting electron in check and "neutralized". As the elements become bigger and acquire an imbalance in charge more neutrons become necessary to keep the element neutral since this is not a perfect or completely necessary addition for some stability the result is isotopes. Just a theory, as I said I don't have the math skills to quantify this. I suppose a mathematical equation of the total charges involved in a "standard atom" (not an Isotope) would be at a deficit in charge which can be balanced by the addition of neutrons. I think a statistical analysis of isotopes could prove or disprove the theory. The most common Isotope should equal the deficit.
Hey Langers, I enjoyed watching your video. My kids changed my life too.