Timeline for Where does a normal force come from?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 11, 2019 at 18:43 | vote | accept | Yan R. | ||
| Jun 26, 2018 at 11:55 | history | edited | user89220 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1735 characters in body
|
| Jun 19, 2018 at 14:42 | comment | added | user153036 | Cool, thanks.., it is interesting. I would have thought on Lenard jones potential, for example... | |
| Jun 19, 2018 at 8:27 | comment | added | user89220 | @santimirandarp Ha, ha:) No, not "my theory"; I have no theories:) As in my comment above yours, replying to Ruslan/safesphere, it's what I read in a textbook, but now that you ask I can't recall exactly which one -- most likely from 1st or 2nd year graduate qm course. And I recall the explanation precisely because I was a bit surprised myself -- probably would have previously guessed along the lines of "electrostatic" had I ever thought about it. Just like the op and some other remarks here. Anyway, like you implicitly ask, a reference would be nice. Anybody know of one, offhand?... | |
| Jun 19, 2018 at 4:41 | comment | added | user153036 | Is this your theory or has any proof? It seems totally logical for me a simple electrical repulsion, but of course I'm asking cause am not sure about that. | |
| Jun 17, 2018 at 9:19 | comment | added | user89220 | @Ruslan and safesphere, etc. I wasn't denying (as in your "...wrong to deny..." comment) electromagnetism. I waffled, saying, "It's not exactly..." and "Rather, it's ultimately...", precisely to avoid outright denying. Obviously, the world and the nature of matter (to the extent anything even recognizable as "matter" would exist) would be enormously and fundamentally different without E&M. But I focused on exchange forces, because that >>is the typical textbook explanation<< to the op's question about what happens at the atomic level that keeps objects apart. Anybody disagree with that? | |
| Jun 17, 2018 at 0:43 | comment | added | safesphere | @tox123 Hypothetically you probably could, although neutrinos usually fly apart near the speed of light, so this would not be realistic to accomplish. In any case the point here is that with electromagnetism removed the exchange force would not even hold the table together. | |
| Jun 17, 2018 at 0:09 | comment | added | tox123 | @safesphere could you not, in theory provided there was a way of getting the neutrinos close enough, have a dense cluster of neutrinos repel another dense cluster of neutrinos pushing against the first? | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 22:58 | comment | added | safesphere | @Ruslan I agree plus there would be no exchange force at all or it would be dramatically smaller without electromagnetism. A wave function of the electron represents a quantum electromagnetic field. Without electromagnetism the electron becomes a neutrino. Good luck with the exchange force between neutrinos holding a mug on a table. | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 20:45 | comment | added | Ruslan | Without electromagnetism the exchange forces would do nothing here. The electrons and nuclei wouldn't hold together, and the table would simply be a bunch of unbonded particles, which wouldn't make any normal force. So it's wrong to deny the electromagnetic nature of the normal force. | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 18:26 | comment | added | user89220 | @Nat Oh, sorry. I mistakenly thought it had something to do with this eg, ie stuff. | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 18:21 | comment | added | user89220 | @Nat please don't edit the post just to remove my wikipedia cites. I rolled it back. It's completely clear from the op's question that he isn't already familiar with these terms. So he needs some explanation. And I just gave him some cites, and he can ask followup questions if he has any interest or further questions about those concepts. But his profile tells nothing about his background, whereby I didn't want to bother trying to explain them, since I have no idea how to pitch such a discussion. Or if the op's even interested at all. | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 18:15 | history | rollback | user89220 |
Rollback to Revision 1
|
|
| Jun 16, 2018 at 18:12 | comment | added | user89220 | @Nat (and at-KyleKanos), Gee, guys, this is fun:). And just for the record (though I have no idea why on Earth we'd want a record about any of this:), I did mean "for example". That is (just to get an i.e. in there), there are many, many web pages about exchange forces and about the Slater determinant, and I was just illustrating one each among those many. The op should google these terms himself for more or less mathematical/technical discussions. | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 18:00 | comment | added | Kyle Kanos | @Nat not "basically", i.e. and e.g. are both abbreviations for Latin phrases that mean exactly what you wrote | |
| Jun 16, 2018 at 17:52 | history | edited | Nat | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 8 characters in body
|
| Jun 16, 2018 at 17:41 | history | answered | user89220 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |