Post #2189152

2026-04-16 13:59 UTC

@deetwenty@todon.nl I'm just stuck on the thought that this feels like a classical view of empty space. Like, I think we now have to define what empty space is, because as @howking@mastodonczech.cz responded here, matter is most definitely compressible if there's enough gravity, but in my mind, it does not follow that this means that there's a reduction of what we would interpret as empty space. Like, what does an electron look like in its orbital? My casual knowledge leads me to believe it's a probability "slurry" in that volume, definitely present, but not exactly defined unless you collapse it with an observation. Compressing that volume (as might happen with a star on its way to neutron star status) doesn't necessarily mean that a volume is *losing* empty space. An orbital is still a unit of "electron is probably here", and the electron's wave still fills that volume in such a way that excludes other electrons, so even if that volume gets smaller, it is effectively still fully occupied or "filled". Likewise with the distance between nucleus and orbitals. If it's effectively off-limits except under specific circumstances (coloumb barrier?), how is it different from any piece of matter attempting to travel through an orbital where it *might* interact but might not? Is this an extremely wrong view of what is happening subatomically?

Replies (1)

@deetwenty@todon.nl 2026-04-16 15:15

@Adorable_Sergal@hachyderm.io @howking@mastodonczech.cz in a way the electron is spread out over the wave form that makes the orbital, given that the mass of the electron is tiny that makes the density extremely low like when you have an empty room (unfurnished, nobody inside) in a house it is still filled with air (so on a technicality the room isn't actually empty even if most people would say so). On top of that there are interpretations of quantum mechanics that do not interpret the wave function as anything real, but just a result of limitations of what's possible to measure (e.g. pilot wave), now most physicists believe the wave function is something real but currently impossible to prove. Having said all that, the question your asking are the more interesting ones, because it raises the question "what does empty even mean?", and "if we account for virtual particles and background energy is space even ever empty?"

Open ##2189153