Anyone thought about relating atoms and molecules to planets?

Question

I am thinking one day and used the golden ratio rule which applies to nature and applied it to atoms and molecules and planets. My logic is that our planets is a superiorly magnified version of atom and molecules. With the sun replaced with protons and other planets as electrons. Time factor wise meaning that our time is relatively super slow compared to what is going on inside our protons and electrons.

After said all this, let me emphasize on what is beyond our universe or within our atoms.

Our earth or solar system or universe might be only an atom of another substance (water? air? solid?) in the outer region (means we are only an atom of another being. Or come to think of it, there is a possibility of another earth within our atoms and molecules. But time frame wise, in our blink of an eye, their universe or earth might have lived for 1 billion years, and the same with our universe compared to the outer region and so on. Anyone thought of that before?

I agree with some of your thoughts. But even until now, scientist have not been able to answer the term gravity.
In terms of electromagnetism, the sun do infact produce electromagnetism as well.

Changes of planets within solar system is in fact, relevant because in fact oursolar system lost the planet pluto sometime in the near past.

If the time is right and if a chunk of huge space debris enter into the sun's gravitational force at the right time and is slow enough, it would be orbiting the sun and become another planet.

Try drawing the movement of atoms and the solar system on a 3d scale and compare.

As I said, just imagine the time frame. The time frame of ours is much much much much slower than the ones in the atoms.

Neutrons and elctrons are just moving too fast for us to see. Our universe is too huge for us to imagine. Try imagining living in an electron, compared to earth, and Antares star.

Just an accountant dreaming to be a scientist.

Just think about it in a massive scale. We may not think of a solar system as a cloud but how bout as a Galaxy cloud or milky way? It may seem irrelevant if you think of it only as a solar system.

Atoms not only exist in matters but also in air and the density of the electrons/protons/atoms are lesser (I think)

Scientists are currently finding newer stuffs within the atoms when they break atoms and stuff using some atomic accelerator of stuff by smashing them up.

Some atoms like air are in gaseous forms (Think of gas planets)

Answer 1

The interesting thing about your question, is that we can use electrons - like right now! Were they not contiguous entities in Real Time, then we could not have lights on to help us read our computer screens.

The sadness about String Thought is that its inferior modeling permits blather to invade our model of the atom.

Gravity and its harmonics skew the results of all our experimentation to the point where we can demonstrate electrons as a 'cloud'. Bunk, else chemistry and a few other well-established functions would be random, not locked-in.

Keep your model of the Sun and Planets in atoms, and understand that the stage upon which we view atoms is vibrating at a frequency so high that the reference has shifted for the smallest Significant Moment during any survey - that the universe has moved, and far faster than can the atom keep up. In that environment, you get blurring and randomness for instruments and models as slow as are ours.

Answer 2

yeah, lots of people have tried to make the comparison, only it doesn't work for most cases. the major similarity is that there is a core (nucleus) like the Sun, and stuff (electrons) flies around it (like planets). the problem comes in when you place all planets in the same plane of orbit...that never happens in atoms. Also in atoms, there is a special condition when a particular electron ring is full. that never happens in space. You can't steal or share a planet with some other solar system like you can in atomic physics.

So while the idea is not new, and it is neat you stumbled onto it somehow, as a means of comparing outer space or solar systems to something most people know and understand this really falls way short of being a "good" comparison. The two items are really quite different.

Answer 3

No. Nobody has *ever* thought of this analogy before. It is quite original with you. Of course, the fact that planets and electrons actually don't act the same way (even when size and time differences are taken into account) is completely irrelevant.

How are they different? Well, planets work under the influence of gravity. Electrons under electromagnetism. Planets work at the scale of classical physics: they have actual orbits. Electrons act at the level of quantum physics: they don't actually orbit an atom, they are more 'smeared out'. Planets don't 'bind stars together' in the way that electrons bind atoms together.

The list continues indefinitely.

Answer 4

The raellians ( a cult in France) teach this as spiritual truth. The solar system, they say, is an atom, and each of our atoms is a solar system, and all the atoms in that solar system are also tiny solar systems, ad infinitum.

Answer 5

The bible says God is gentle. gentle is potential . In 1905, Albert Einstein formulated E=MC2 which says that potential has continuously existed, the two as mass or potential. So God being potential, has continuously existed and became into on no account created, because of the fact potential continuously has existed and continuously will exist.

Answer 6

This is a very OLD notion. It has been antiquated for about sixty or seventy years.

There is no correlation between electron "clouds", or orbitals and the orbits of planets. Please research and update your out-of-date thinking.

Answer 7

Please. stick with accounting. Your imagination is being stretched to the breaking point because of your limited knowledge of physics. You get an A for effort.