3050: Atom
Not to be confused with 1490: Atoms.
| Atom |
 Title text: What's weirder is that muons turned out to be INCREDIBLY cute. |
Explanation[edit]
Atoms are small. Very, very small.[citation needed] An individual atom generally cannot be seen with the naked eye nor discerned with human hands (of course larger structures made of many atoms can be seen just fine). To try and observe atoms better, the characters in the comic invented a so-called "quantum expander device" that can grow an individual atom large enough to handle with human fingers. Such a device would be a huge advance in modern physics (and possibly quite dangerous) if it existed, but unfortunately/fortunately it does not.
This world-changing advancement in the very foundation of physics turns out to be undercut by the bizarre and repulsive way the expanded atoms behave to human sensibilities. Thus derives the humor: proposing that an individual atom, normally intangible, would actually turn out to have properties very similar of macroscopic objects, in particular slimy lifeforms that human bodies find "gross".
Cueball, holding the atom by the electron cloud, complains that the atom is "wet and wobbly." Although electrons are often depicted as orbiting an atomic nucleus very similarly to how planets orbit the Sun, this is an extremely simplistic model of how the electrons are positioned. Students are often taught a succession of more complex models over several years of schooling. In reality, current understanding of the behavior of electrons is ruled by quantum mechanics and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. An electron doesn't have a single exact location relative to the nucleus; rather, its location is probabilistic. It can be considered to be "smeared out", with specific locations in space having higher or lower concentrations. This is often visualized to be similar to how a meteorological cloud can be dense or thin. It's often depicted by showing the shapes of the electron density patterns with varying intensities of color, or densely-packed dots vs. spread-out dots. This is sometimes referred to as the "electron cloud model", though electrons aren't really composed of tiny droplets. A cloud in the sky contains water, and is often assumed to be wet, but could be anything from vapour to ice-crystals. The feel of wetness is also a lot more complicated than we might think. Everybody knows what something wet feels like, but there are no "wetness"-detecting cells in the skin. Apparently the brain uses various clues like temperature and pressure, along with past experiences, to determine when something feels "wet".
Scientists generally wear latex gloves when touching certain subjects of study, certainly those that are expected to be damp, and perhaps Ponytail and Cueball should be doing that here.
There are mathematical techniques known as "quantum expanders" which reveal more detail and better understanding about the statistical probabilities of the "quantum cloud". For the purpose of the joke, the science team in the comic created a device that actually expands the atom to a scale that it can be held in one's hands and the electron cloud could be felt.
The size of a mid-sized atom can be estimated as between 100 and 200 picometer (full data table). Assuming an iron atom of ~150 pm size, to enlarge it up to a ~60-70 cm size as it is displayed in the comic, one would have to enlarge it by a factor of ca. 4 trillion. Doing the same enlargement with a ~2mm diameter peppercorn would enlarge that seed to a planet rivaling the Earth.
The title text expands on this, claiming that muons, a type of subatomic particle, apparently are "cute" despite ordinarily being subatomic particles with a mean lifetime of 2.2 microseconds, give or take. Muons might be considered cute because they're small — like electrons and tau particles, they are considered to be point phenomena at the quantum level with no practical physical size (at or below subatomic Planck-scale), although possibly that (and the time they last) changes as a function of the quantum expander being applied to them. It might possibly also reference a certain way of pronouncing "muon", which starts with a "mew" sound, which in turn is associated with kittens (and a fairly cute Pokémon).
In reality/practice, touching oversized electrons might not be recommended - as that may result in electric discharges - or protons being "ripped" out of your body and falling on the oversized electron, while normal electrons are "ripped" out of your body and scattered elsewhere (assuming that the oversized electron has proportionately bigger attraction and repulsion compared to normal-sized particles, which is not clear from the comic). In other words - you could be disintegrated and electrocuted, and a giant explosion will occur. Oversized electrons may also behave like piles of densely packed electrons. Oversizing a proton could also be dangerous for roughly same reasons - except this time, electrons wold fall on oversized proton, while normal protons would get scattered. Presumably, it's advisable to practice Quantum Expanding with neutrons instead, as it shouldn't react as violently to normal-sized particles.
However, a free neutron decays with a mean lifetime of about 14 minutes, converting part of its mass to 0.78 MeV energy. If the neutron was scaled up to the mass of a tennis ball (rather than remain the same mass, only larger), it would weigh about 57 grams. If that means that the decay energy is scaled up by the same factor, it would release about 25 orders of magnitude more energy upon decay: 1kT TNT equivalent or half the force of the 2020 Beirut explosion.
Upscaling muons or quarks to the size of watermelons may be utterly disastrous - even more so than packed electrons - as they may be the very foundation of the laws of physics; potentially, it may destroy the entire Universe. On top of that, upscaling quarks to the size of watermelons sounds like it could ruin color symmetry - as two quarks are now left without the third quark, and the big quark is now alone. That was explained in HPtMoR chapter 119 and a particularly munchkinish build of World of Darkness vampire mad scientist. Possibly, such destructive capacity of oversized muons (despite their "cuteness") may be part of the joke - as a fairly cute Pokémon in question was a powerful "legendary Pokemon".
Transcript[edit]
- [Cueball is holding in one hand, away from himself, an atom approximately the size of his head with shaky lines drawn around the atom. Ponytail has her hand near the atom and her other hand above her chin. Lines near the edge of the atom near her hand indicates the atom is wobbling. Hairy stands to the right of Ponytail.]
- Cueball: Ugh, the electron cloud is so weird and wobbly! I hate it!
- Ponytail: Why is it so wet? How can it even be wet?
- Hairy: I don't want to do physics anymore.
- [Caption below the panel:]
- When our lab was building the quantum expander device, we didn't expect our first discovery to be "atoms are really gross."
Add comment 
Create topic (use sparingly) 
Refresh Discussion
...admittedly very barebones but at least it isn't blank. Someone smarter than me can expand it. Anyways, the Higgs boson feels like fuzzy dice you can't convince me otherwise 172.69.71.143 13:51, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Well, if they want to test that theory, they're going to have to find it again RadiantRainwing (talk) 14:46, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- I just added a little about wetness. I don't have time to look into this more, but perhaps the idea is the outer electrons have a low enough energy level they pull heat from the skin, and that sensation of coldness along with the little bumps the electrons would do against your skin would lead your brain to think they're wet. That's all I got for now. Gbisaga (talk) 15:11, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- i always thought that the electron cloud feels like a water wiggler... 162.158.28.161 (talk) 18:57, 14 February 2025 (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- It's possible that the wetness might be a reference to the Nuclear drip line. SammyChips (talk) 00:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
I want fanart of the muons on my talk page by tomorrow. Do I make myself clear?! /j --Caliban (talk) 14:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- meowons. ~~(^_^)~~ 172.68.150.7 03:24, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Sir, this is an internets. Someone has likely already made it. guess who (if you desire conversing | what i have done) 03:38, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- The muon fanart has been delivered to your talkpage. Please do enjoy. 162.158.122.172 12:08, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
atom 172.70.126.65 15:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Might be worth mentioning the popculture idea of expanding a subatomic particle found in "Three Body Problem" where they unfold the '11 dimensions' of a proton to make it, apparently, a planet-sized sheet and etch microcircuitry on it. (Programming question: how many bugs can dance on the tip of a proton? but I digress.) The most annoying part of quantum expansion would be how the particle gets entangled with _everything_ Bilkie (talk) 15:31, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Such a weird story. I always felt like I was missing some cultural context. I still enjoyed it. 172.71.155.47 15:52, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
So, ummm... What happens if they accidentally expanded an unstable atom to that size and it decayed? How earth shattering or otherwise is the kaboom? 172.69.23.176 20:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Ballpark, that atom is probably max of 1 kg, based on how Cueball is holding it. If it's U235, which has a mass of about 0.4e-24 kg, then it's scaled up by a factor of 2.5e24. U235 has a decay energy of 4.7 MeV, which is 0.75e-12 joules, so scaled up that would be about 2e12 joules, about 450 tons of TNT. That's about 1/3 of the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. Not "big" as these things go, but certainly big enough. On the other hand, U235 has a half life of 700 million years, so the odds are low. 172.70.115.100 (talk) 21:29, 12 February 2025 (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- We also don't know how the Quantum Expander affects all its physical properties. Does its mass increase to have the density of its size as if filled with 'normal' copies of it, or is it the original atom-mass (technically, that'd be like a vacuum balloon), or something between (mostly the mass of the nucleons scaled up to some degree, but still even more 'empty'). The resulting gravitational interaction might or might not match its inertial mass (which would be very interesting!), and parts of it that are normally point-phenomena are now probably(?) macroscopic in size, but may retain the same field-profiles (charge, etc, on top of the already considered gravitation). And how does the scale of time change, now that the speed of light (assuming that isn't increased across the interior of the Expanded quantum-realm) means that relative timings across the width of the atom must run slower for any propogated effects. (On the one hand, a 700 million year half-life may be vastly extended; on the other, when any single atom fissions, it fissions in its entirety, and who knows what 'poking and prodding' it will do, and if it works like the arrival of prompt or delayed neutrons from one fission event that might promote a neighbouring one.) We really need to know more about the QED, including about how it influences QED, before we can declare it completely Q.E.D. 172.71.26.37 22:43, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
My first thoughts upon seeing the words "Atom" and "Electron" was "is thing going to be about text editors"? Anyway, upping my caffeine levels now. --Coconut Galaxy (talk) 07:30, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
This reminded me of a college friend who wanted to be a veterinarian, then quit the program. When asked why, he said the decision came when he and his classmates were supposed to put their hand up a cow's butt. I think he was joking(mostly?) but I was reminded by "I don't want to do physics anymore". The "sensation of coldness along with the little bumps" tracks, often things much colder than their immediate environment can seem wet. Although if giant electrons still acted as electrons, wouldn't racing around at such high speeds make the atom super hot? Sorry, I'm a bit rambly. Cuvtixo (talk) 21:15, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
This is currently a terrible explanation, both in its absurd length and that it's almost entirely avoiding actual explanation. 172.70.211.83 07:06, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Add comment
