Colliding particles and Activation energy
$begingroup$
If two particles collide and they are under activation energy, why do they JUST “bounce apart”? Isn’t the activation energy steadily decreasing if those particles continuously collide?
I always viewed the activation energy as a "barrier" that prevents collisions from producing a reaction, if sufficient energy is not met. I thought that if particles collide and they do not have enough energy to cause a reaction, the "barrier" gets weakened. Therefore, I found it surprising that this "barrier" doesn't get weakened, and the activation energy isn't reduced.
equilibrium energy
asked 2 hours ago
minori minusminori minus
61
New contributor
minori minus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If two particles collide and they are under activation energy, why do they JUST “bounce apart”? Isn’t the activation energy steadily decreasing if those particles continuously collide?
I always viewed the activation energy as a "barrier" that prevents collisions from producing a reaction, if sufficient energy is not met. I thought that if particles collide and they do not have enough energy to cause a reaction, the "barrier" gets weakened. Therefore, I found it surprising that this "barrier" doesn't get weakened, and the activation energy isn't reduced.
equilibrium energy
asked 2 hours ago
minori minusminori minus
61
New contributor
minori minus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Atoms and molecules obviously don't wear out. Not in a minute, or a year, or a million years. If there's no reaction, they stay exactly the same.
$endgroup$
– Karl
23 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
Reactants have to jump over the barrier, not bulldoze through it. Think high jump rather than American football.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
22 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If two particles collide and they are under activation energy, why do they JUST “bounce apart”? Isn’t the activation energy steadily decreasing if those particles continuously collide?
I always viewed the activation energy as a "barrier" that prevents collisions from producing a reaction, if sufficient energy is not met. I thought that if particles collide and they do not have enough energy to cause a reaction, the "barrier" gets weakened. Therefore, I found it surprising that this "barrier" doesn't get weakened, and the activation energy isn't reduced.
equilibrium energy
asked 2 hours ago
minori minusminori minus
61
New contributor
minori minus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
If two particles collide and they are under activation energy, why do they JUST “bounce apart”? Isn’t the activation energy steadily decreasing if those particles continuously collide?
I always viewed the activation energy as a "barrier" that prevents collisions from producing a reaction, if sufficient energy is not met. I thought that if particles collide and they do not have enough energy to cause a reaction, the "barrier" gets weakened. Therefore, I found it surprising that this "barrier" doesn't get weakened, and the activation energy isn't reduced.
equilibrium energy
equilibrium energy
asked 2 hours ago
minori minusminori minus
61
New contributor
minori minus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 hours ago
minori minusminori minus
61
New contributor
minori minus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 hours ago
minori minusminori minus
61
New contributor
minori minus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 hours ago
minori minusminori minus
61
asked 2 hours ago
minori minusminori minus
61
61
New contributor
minori minus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
minori minus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
minori minus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
$begingroup$
Atoms and molecules obviously don't wear out. Not in a minute, or a year, or a million years. If there's no reaction, they stay exactly the same.
$endgroup$
– Karl
23 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
Reactants have to jump over the barrier, not bulldoze through it. Think high jump rather than American football.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
22 mins ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Atoms and molecules obviously don't wear out. Not in a minute, or a year, or a million years. If there's no reaction, they stay exactly the same.
$endgroup$
– Karl
23 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
Reactants have to jump over the barrier, not bulldoze through it. Think high jump rather than American football.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
22 mins ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Atoms and molecules obviously don't wear out. Not in a minute, or a year, or a million years. If there's no reaction, they stay exactly the same.
$endgroup$
– Karl
23 mins ago
$begingroup$
Atoms and molecules obviously don't wear out. Not in a minute, or a year, or a million years. If there's no reaction, they stay exactly the same.
$endgroup$
– Karl
23 mins ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Reactants have to jump over the barrier, not bulldoze through it. Think high jump rather than American football.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
22 mins ago
$begingroup$
Reactants have to jump over the barrier, not bulldoze through it. Think high jump rather than American football.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
22 mins ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is the nature of the quantum world. An action, at some level, either takes place or does not... there is no half-way state. Another example is the photoelectric effect. Planck and Einstein explained the requirement for at least a minimum energy of a photon before it can raise an electron to a higher energy level. A million photons just under that energy will not* raise an electron to a higher level, but just a single photon of the required energy (or higher) can bump up the electron.
Caveat: There is also the uncertainty principle, allowing electrons to tunnel to a higher level, or for multi-photon absorption to cause ionization, but they're not as common as single-photon absorption and ionization.
If you're bothered by this non-intuitive behavior, you're not alone. Bohr, Bose, Boltzmann, Einstein, and others were forced to this theory through experimental results and the horrors of the ultraviolet catastrophe. Those who fail to appreciate the ultraviolet catastrophe shall be made, energetically, to walk the Planck.
answered 59 mins ago
DrMoishe PippikDrMoishe Pippik
14.8k1231
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "431"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
minori minus is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f114514%2fcolliding-particles-and-activation-energy%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is the nature of the quantum world. An action, at some level, either takes place or does not... there is no half-way state. Another example is the photoelectric effect. Planck and Einstein explained the requirement for at least a minimum energy of a photon before it can raise an electron to a higher energy level. A million photons just under that energy will not* raise an electron to a higher level, but just a single photon of the required energy (or higher) can bump up the electron.
Caveat: There is also the uncertainty principle, allowing electrons to tunnel to a higher level, or for multi-photon absorption to cause ionization, but they're not as common as single-photon absorption and ionization.
If you're bothered by this non-intuitive behavior, you're not alone. Bohr, Bose, Boltzmann, Einstein, and others were forced to this theory through experimental results and the horrors of the ultraviolet catastrophe. Those who fail to appreciate the ultraviolet catastrophe shall be made, energetically, to walk the Planck.
answered 59 mins ago
DrMoishe PippikDrMoishe Pippik
14.8k1231
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is the nature of the quantum world. An action, at some level, either takes place or does not... there is no half-way state. Another example is the photoelectric effect. Planck and Einstein explained the requirement for at least a minimum energy of a photon before it can raise an electron to a higher energy level. A million photons just under that energy will not* raise an electron to a higher level, but just a single photon of the required energy (or higher) can bump up the electron.
Caveat: There is also the uncertainty principle, allowing electrons to tunnel to a higher level, or for multi-photon absorption to cause ionization, but they're not as common as single-photon absorption and ionization.
If you're bothered by this non-intuitive behavior, you're not alone. Bohr, Bose, Boltzmann, Einstein, and others were forced to this theory through experimental results and the horrors of the ultraviolet catastrophe. Those who fail to appreciate the ultraviolet catastrophe shall be made, energetically, to walk the Planck.
answered 59 mins ago
DrMoishe PippikDrMoishe Pippik
14.8k1231
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is the nature of the quantum world. An action, at some level, either takes place or does not... there is no half-way state. Another example is the photoelectric effect. Planck and Einstein explained the requirement for at least a minimum energy of a photon before it can raise an electron to a higher energy level. A million photons just under that energy will not* raise an electron to a higher level, but just a single photon of the required energy (or higher) can bump up the electron.
Caveat: There is also the uncertainty principle, allowing electrons to tunnel to a higher level, or for multi-photon absorption to cause ionization, but they're not as common as single-photon absorption and ionization.
If you're bothered by this non-intuitive behavior, you're not alone. Bohr, Bose, Boltzmann, Einstein, and others were forced to this theory through experimental results and the horrors of the ultraviolet catastrophe. Those who fail to appreciate the ultraviolet catastrophe shall be made, energetically, to walk the Planck.
answered 59 mins ago
DrMoishe PippikDrMoishe Pippik
14.8k1231
$endgroup$
This is the nature of the quantum world. An action, at some level, either takes place or does not... there is no half-way state. Another example is the photoelectric effect. Planck and Einstein explained the requirement for at least a minimum energy of a photon before it can raise an electron to a higher energy level. A million photons just under that energy will not* raise an electron to a higher level, but just a single photon of the required energy (or higher) can bump up the electron.
Caveat: There is also the uncertainty principle, allowing electrons to tunnel to a higher level, or for multi-photon absorption to cause ionization, but they're not as common as single-photon absorption and ionization.
If you're bothered by this non-intuitive behavior, you're not alone. Bohr, Bose, Boltzmann, Einstein, and others were forced to this theory through experimental results and the horrors of the ultraviolet catastrophe. Those who fail to appreciate the ultraviolet catastrophe shall be made, energetically, to walk the Planck.
answered 59 mins ago
DrMoishe PippikDrMoishe Pippik
14.8k1231
answered 59 mins ago
DrMoishe PippikDrMoishe Pippik
14.8k1231
answered 59 mins ago
DrMoishe PippikDrMoishe Pippik
14.8k1231
answered 59 mins ago
DrMoishe PippikDrMoishe Pippik
14.8k1231
14.8k1231
add a comment |
add a comment |
minori minus is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
minori minus is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
minori minus is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
minori minus is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f114514%2fcolliding-particles-and-activation-energy%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
$begingroup$
Atoms and molecules obviously don't wear out. Not in a minute, or a year, or a million years. If there's no reaction, they stay exactly the same.
$endgroup$
– Karl
23 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
Reactants have to jump over the barrier, not bulldoze through it. Think high jump rather than American football.
$endgroup$
– Karsten Theis
22 mins ago