subject
Physics, 18.03.2022 02:10 scasemere

The modern model of the atom describes electrons in a little less specific detail than earlier models did. Why is it that being less sure about the placement of electrons in an atom is actually an improvement over earlier models? Electrons do not follow specific paths, so describing the area where an electron is likely to be is more scientifically accurate.
Electrons were thought to be negatively charged, but now scientists know that their charge depends on their energy level.
The modern model is based on mathematical equations, so the results become less clear when the decimals are rounded.
The position of electrons in atomic models has changed so much that it is better to have a less specific model than to be wrong again..

ansver
Answers: 2

Another question on Physics

question
Physics, 22.06.2019 11:30
(2) (a) you have a simple circuit that consists of only a battery (δvbat=1.5v) and two resistors with resistance r1=10ω and r2=5ω, connected in series with each other. what is the current running through the battery? (b) you re-arrange your circuit so now r2 is attached in parallel to r1 rather than in series. what is the current running through the battery? (c) you add an additional resistor r3=7ω on the same branch as r2. what is the current running through the battery? (d) what is the power dissipated in r3?
Answers: 3
question
Physics, 22.06.2019 17:00
Adiver named jacques observes a bubble of air rising from the bottom of a lake (where the absolute pressure is 3.50 atm) to the surface (where the pressure is 1.00 atm). the temperature at the bottom is 4.00 ∘c, and the temperature at the surface is 23.0 ∘c.what is the ratio of the volume of the bubble as it reaches the surface (vs) to its volume at the bottom (vb)? if jaques were to hold his breath the air in his lungs would be kept at a constant temperature. would it be safe for jacques to hold his breath while ascending from the bottom of the lake to the surface?
Answers: 1
question
Physics, 22.06.2019 22:20
One hazard of space travel is debris left by previous missions. there are several thousand masses large enough to detect by radar orbiting the earth, but there are far greater numbers of very small masses such as flakes of paint. calculate the force exerted by a 0.110 mg chip of paint that strikes a space shuttle window at a relative speed of 5.00 ✕ 103 m/s and sticks, given the collision lasts 6.00 ✕ 10-8 s. such a collision chipped the window of the ill-fated challenger in june 1983, causing $50,000 of damage.
Answers: 2
question
Physics, 23.06.2019 02:00
Does the asteroid belt revolve around the sun?
Answers: 2
You know the right answer?
The modern model of the atom describes electrons in a little less specific detail than earlier model...
Questions
question
Mathematics, 19.01.2021 19:10
Questions on the website: 13722359