- #1
Bassalisk
- 947
- 2
Hello,
I am apprentice in quantum physics and physics generally. When Rutherford posted his model, he was strongly negated because of the fact that electrons will fall in nucleus. Well i got that part quiet well but when i learned that planet goes around its sun mainly because inertia (losing very small fraction to surroundings) and finally grasped the concept of circular motion, it struck me. I am puzzled here, why they didn't assume that electron has inertia too or something. If electron would collapse to nucleus why wouldn't Earth collapse to sun? Coulumb's force=gravity imo.
I am probably getting some concepts here wrong, but i cannot find consist answer anywhere about Earth's revolution.
Can u correct me and try to answer my question?
Thank you.
I am apprentice in quantum physics and physics generally. When Rutherford posted his model, he was strongly negated because of the fact that electrons will fall in nucleus. Well i got that part quiet well but when i learned that planet goes around its sun mainly because inertia (losing very small fraction to surroundings) and finally grasped the concept of circular motion, it struck me. I am puzzled here, why they didn't assume that electron has inertia too or something. If electron would collapse to nucleus why wouldn't Earth collapse to sun? Coulumb's force=gravity imo.
I am probably getting some concepts here wrong, but i cannot find consist answer anywhere about Earth's revolution.
Can u correct me and try to answer my question?
Thank you.