2734: Electron Color - Revision history

FaviFake: Undo revision 387258 by 120.244.218.213 (talk) sounds like an ad

2025-09-20T13:10:55Z

Undo revision 387258 by 120.244.218.213 (talk) sounds like an ad

120.244.218.213: coloring the elcetron on the web

2025-09-20T06:44:29Z

coloring the elcetron on the web

FaviFake at 10:43, 28 July 2025

2025-07-28T10:43:17Z

Revolutionary girl euclid: /* Explanation */ Why did this article have beef with a stick figure? also, I cleaned up explanation a little bit; honestly the whole "correction" is probably unneeded, but I don't want to be too un-pedantic considering what wiki we're on.

2025-05-06T18:38:12Z

‎Explanation: Why did this article have beef with a stick figure? also, I cleaned up explanation a little bit; honestly the whole "correction" is probably unneeded, but I don't want to be too un-pedantic considering what wiki we're on.

CalibansCreations: bring cursing back to ex kay seedy >:[

2025-01-22T09:58:59Z

bring cursing back to ex kay seedy >:[

172.71.98.24: /* Explanation */ Changed style

2024-11-04T15:36:08Z

‎Explanation: Changed style

Apollo11: I dont know if they ment to italicize or to put quotation so i just put quotation around it

2024-09-12T15:11:53Z

I dont know if they ment to italicize or to put quotation so i just put quotation around it

141.101.105.132: /* Explanation */

2024-07-29T07:04:36Z

‎Explanation

WaddleDeo: /* Explanation */

2023-11-14T19:07:51Z

‎Explanation

FaviFake at 09:04, 8 July 2023

2023-07-08T09:04:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:10, 20 September 2025
Line 23:		Line 23:

	The title text refers to the {{w\|color charge}} property of quarks, a property which is part of {{w\|quantum chromodynamics}}. In quantum chromodynamics, a quark's color can take one of three values or charges: red, green, and blue. An antiquark can take one of three anticolors: called antired, antigreen, and antiblue. As mentioned by [[Randall]], these have nothing to do with color as we know it, but is just a way to represent interactions between quarks in a sufficiently analogous fashion that avoids inventing entirely new words to describe a particular threefold quality of the necessary {{w\|color confinement\|inter-quark groupings}}. And he jokingly says that the 20th century physicists that came up with the three color system did this as as admission that numbers are boring. They could just have called the color charges "1", "2" and "3", though this may imply an unwarranted hierarchy, progression or other standard mathematical relationship that does not actually apply.		The title text refers to the {{w\|color charge}} property of quarks, a property which is part of {{w\|quantum chromodynamics}}. In quantum chromodynamics, a quark's color can take one of three values or charges: red, green, and blue. An antiquark can take one of three anticolors: called antired, antigreen, and antiblue. As mentioned by [[Randall]], these have nothing to do with color as we know it, but is just a way to represent interactions between quarks in a sufficiently analogous fashion that avoids inventing entirely new words to describe a particular threefold quality of the necessary {{w\|color confinement\|inter-quark groupings}}. And he jokingly says that the 20th century physicists that came up with the three color system did this as as admission that numbers are boring. They could just have called the color charges "1", "2" and "3", though this may imply an unwarranted hierarchy, progression or other standard mathematical relationship that does not actually apply.
−
−	~~==Display Effect (Shows as on web pages)==~~
−	Want to turn electron-related images into colorable line art or color electron-themed patterns online? Try [https://gencoloring.ai GenColoring AI] — it quickly converts electron images into coloring pages and supports direct online coloring for electron patterns, with simple and fun operations.

	==Transcript==		==Transcript==

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:44, 20 September 2025
Line 23:		Line 23:

	The title text refers to the {{w\|color charge}} property of quarks, a property which is part of {{w\|quantum chromodynamics}}. In quantum chromodynamics, a quark's color can take one of three values or charges: red, green, and blue. An antiquark can take one of three anticolors: called antired, antigreen, and antiblue. As mentioned by [[Randall]], these have nothing to do with color as we know it, but is just a way to represent interactions between quarks in a sufficiently analogous fashion that avoids inventing entirely new words to describe a particular threefold quality of the necessary {{w\|color confinement\|inter-quark groupings}}. And he jokingly says that the 20th century physicists that came up with the three color system did this as as admission that numbers are boring. They could just have called the color charges "1", "2" and "3", though this may imply an unwarranted hierarchy, progression or other standard mathematical relationship that does not actually apply.		The title text refers to the {{w\|color charge}} property of quarks, a property which is part of {{w\|quantum chromodynamics}}. In quantum chromodynamics, a quark's color can take one of three values or charges: red, green, and blue. An antiquark can take one of three anticolors: called antired, antigreen, and antiblue. As mentioned by [[Randall]], these have nothing to do with color as we know it, but is just a way to represent interactions between quarks in a sufficiently analogous fashion that avoids inventing entirely new words to describe a particular threefold quality of the necessary {{w\|color confinement\|inter-quark groupings}}. And he jokingly says that the 20th century physicists that came up with the three color system did this as as admission that numbers are boring. They could just have called the color charges "1", "2" and "3", though this may imply an unwarranted hierarchy, progression or other standard mathematical relationship that does not actually apply.
		+
		+	==Display Effect (Shows as on web pages)==
		+	Want to turn electron-related images into colorable line art or color electron-themed patterns online? Try [https://gencoloring.ai GenColoring AI] — it quickly converts electron images into coloring pages and supports direct online coloring for electron patterns, with simple and fun operations.

	==Transcript==		==Transcript==

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Explanation==
-In this comic [[Miss Lenhart]] is teaching a school physics class. One of her students asks what the color of electrons is.
+In this comic [[Miss Lenhart]] is teaching a school physics class. One of her students asks what the color of electrons is. This is a relevant question for a kid to ask since on many scientific diagrams of atoms, the subatomic particles have been assigned colors to identify them for the reader. Neutrons are generally red, green, or gray; protons red or green and electrons might be blue or yellow. But there is no accepted rule for coloring such diagrams, so the kid may be confused. Additionally, some scientific diagrams use color coding rather than actually representative colors, and the kid may be wondering what color particles actually are.
 Miss Lenhart correctly responds that ''...'color' isn't even defined for them,'' and states that, unlike the diagrams, which are colored for convenience, the particles are not colored. Her explanation is incorrect, however: ''They're too small to interact with visible light, ...'' This is a simplification; in fact, every optical effect in our world is due to electrons interacting with light. That leads to color because the electrons are usually bound to various atomic nuclei in molecules etc., which leads to differences in how they take up and give out various energies of photon. But the electrons merely govern the possible quanta of energy changes that influence the broad spectrum of light by which matter is seen; they don't reflect or absorb wavelengths themselves, which is what Miss Lenhart is presumably referring to.
@@ Line 22: / Line 20: @@
 * stating how she feels they would be, if they could possess color.
-But her off-panel pupils take her word for it. One of the kids says "I knew it", to the "fact" that electrons are yellow, and likewise the other pupils completely ignore what Miss Lenhart just told them. The debate then starts as one pupil claims "''and protons are red?''", and another chimes in, with a "''No, they're gray!''" This only makes sense in a debate of how to draw atoms, not regarding their actual color, as Miss Lenhart just explained.
+But her off-panel pupils take her word for it. One of the kids says "I knew it", to the "fact" that electrons are yellow, and likewise the other pupils completely ignore what Miss Lenhart just told them. The debate then starts as one pupil claims "''and protons are red?''", and another chimes in, with a "''No, they're gray!''" This only makes sense in a debate of how to draw atoms, not regarding their actual color, as Miss Lenhart just explained. The opinions over the colors are probably based on what kind of diagrams people were initially exposed to, leading to a predisposition to think that those colors are 'correct'. Although individual electrons do not have a color, it's possible to produce a solution of {{w|Solvated_electron|so-called 'solvated' electrons}}. In ammonia and amines, in certain concentrations, the solution color is blue, and in higher concentrations metallic gold to bronze.
 The title text refers to the {{w|color charge}} property of quarks, a property which is part of {{w|quantum chromodynamics}}. In quantum chromodynamics, a quark's color can take one of three values or charges: red, green, and blue. An antiquark can take one of three anticolors: called antired, antigreen, and antiblue. As mentioned by [[Randall]], these have nothing to do with color as we know it, but is just a way to represent interactions between quarks in a sufficiently analogous fashion that avoids inventing entirely new words to describe a particular threefold quality of the necessary {{w|color confinement|inter-quark groupings}}. And he jokingly says that the 20th century physicists that came up with the three color system did this as as admission that numbers are boring. They could just have called the color charges "1", "2" and "3", though this may imply an unwarranted hierarchy, progression or other standard mathematical relationship that does not actually apply.
@@ Line 49: / Line 43: @@
 [[Category:Comics featuring Miss Lenhart]]
 [[Category:Comics featuring Jill]]
-[[Category:Kids]] <!-- The boy is a boy and thus not adult Hairy -->
+[[Category:Comics featuring children]] <!-- The boy is a boy and thus not adult Hairy -->
 [[Category:Physics]]

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 This is a relevant question for a kid to ask since on many scientific diagrams of atoms, the subatomic particles have been assigned colors to identify them for the reader. Neutrons are generally red, green, or gray; protons red or green and electrons might be blue or yellow. But there is no accepted rule for coloring such diagrams, so the kid may be confused. Additionally, some scientific diagrams use color coding rather than actually representative colors, and the kid may be wondering what color particles actually are.
-In completely off-character style, Miss Lenhart actually gives a correct fact ''...so "color" isn't even defined for them.'' and states that, unlike the diagrams, which are colored for convenience, the particles are not colored. She however gives an inaccurate explanation: ''They're too small to interact with visible light, ...'' In fact, every optical effect in our world is due to electrons interacting with light. That leads to color because the electrons are usually bound to various atomic nuclei in molecules etc., which leads to differences in how they take up and give out various energies of photon. But the electron itself does not have a particular hue that can be shone upon and absorbed/reflected, it merely governs the possible quanta of energy changes involved in generating the broad spectrum of light that the substance formed of the atom(s) may be seen by. Also protons are far "bigger" than electrons (and would interact strongly!), but their interaction with light (and generally electromagnetic radiation) is rarely observable, because they are shielded by the tiny electrons in ordinary matter. So, whether intended or not, Miss Lenhart is in her usual role of talking <s>bullshit</s> malarkey, also see for instance [[1519: Venus]].
+Miss Lenhart correctly responds that ''...'color' isn't even defined for them,'' and states that, unlike the diagrams, which are colored for convenience, the particles are not colored. Her explanation is incorrect, however: ''They're too small to interact with visible light, ...'' This is a simplification; in fact, every optical effect in our world is due to electrons interacting with light. That leads to color because the electrons are usually bound to various atomic nuclei in molecules etc., which leads to differences in how they take up and give out various energies of photon. But the electrons merely govern the possible quanta of energy changes that influence the broad spectrum of light by which matter is seen; they don't reflect or absorb wavelengths themselves, which is what Miss Lenhart is presumably referring to.
 She then continues by saying that electrons are definitely yellow. The reason for this isn't clear.  She may be:

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 This is a relevant question for a kid to ask since on many scientific diagrams of atoms, the subatomic particles have been assigned colors to identify them for the reader. Neutrons are generally red, green, or gray; protons red or green and electrons might be blue or yellow. But there is no accepted rule for coloring such diagrams, so the kid may be confused. Additionally, some scientific diagrams use color coding rather than actually representative colors, and the kid may be wondering what color particles actually are.
-In completely off-character style, Miss Lenhart actually gives a correct fact ''...so "color" isn't even defined for them.'' and states that, unlike the diagrams, which are colored for convenience, the particles are not colored. She however gives an inaccurate explanation: ''They're too small to interact with visible light, ...'' In fact, every optical effect in our world is due to electrons interacting with light. That leads to color because the electrons are usually bound to various atomic nuclei in molecules etc., which leads to differences in how they take up and give out various energies of photon. But the electron itself does not have a particular hue that can be shone upon and absorbed/reflected, it merely governs the possible quanta of energy changes involved in generating the broad spectrum of light that the substance formed of the atom(s) may be seen by. Also protons are far "bigger" than electrons (and would interact strongly!), but their interaction with light (and generally electromagnetic radiation) is rarely observable, because they are shielded by the tiny electrons in ordinary matter. So, whether intended or not, Miss Lenhart is in her usual role of talking nonsense, also see for instance [[1519: Venus]].
+In completely off-character style, Miss Lenhart actually gives a correct fact ''...so "color" isn't even defined for them.'' and states that, unlike the diagrams, which are colored for convenience, the particles are not colored. She however gives an inaccurate explanation: ''They're too small to interact with visible light, ...'' In fact, every optical effect in our world is due to electrons interacting with light. That leads to color because the electrons are usually bound to various atomic nuclei in molecules etc., which leads to differences in how they take up and give out various energies of photon. But the electron itself does not have a particular hue that can be shone upon and absorbed/reflected, it merely governs the possible quanta of energy changes involved in generating the broad spectrum of light that the substance formed of the atom(s) may be seen by. Also protons are far "bigger" than electrons (and would interact strongly!), but their interaction with light (and generally electromagnetic radiation) is rarely observable, because they are shielded by the tiny electrons in ordinary matter. So, whether intended or not, Miss Lenhart is in her usual role of talking <s>bullshit</s> malarkey, also see for instance [[1519: Venus]].
 She then continues by saying that electrons are definitely yellow. The reason for this isn't clear.  She may be:

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 She then continues by saying that electrons are definitely yellow. The reason for this isn't clear.  She may be:
 * meaning that they should be yellow on diagrams, because she feels this is the correct way to depict them in drawings of atoms,
-* referring to the Greek etymology of the word electron ({{w|elektron (resin)|elektron}} is an old name for amber, a yellow gem), or
+* referring to the Greek etymology of the word electron ({{w|elektron (resin)|elektron}} is an old name for amber, a yellow gem),
-* merely teasing her young pupils.
+* merely teasing her young pupils, or
 But her off-panel pupils take her word for it. One of the kids says "I knew it", to the "fact" that electrons are yellow, and likewise the other pupils completely ignore what Miss Lenhart just told them. The debate then starts as one pupil claims ''and protons are red?'', and another chimes in, with a ''No, they're gray!'' This only makes sense in a debate of how to draw atoms, not regarding their actual color, as Miss Lenhart just explained.

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 ==Transcript==
-:[Miss Lenhart is teaching a class. A boy with spiky hair sits at his desks with his hand raised asking a question. Science Girl sits in front of him looking back at him while leaning an arm on the back of her chair.]
+:[Miss Lenhart is teaching a class. A boy with spiky hair sits at his desks with his hand raised asking a question. Jill sits in front of him looking back at him while leaning an arm on the back of her chair.]
 :Miss Lenhart: You have a question?
 :Boy: Yeah-What color are electrons and protons? Are they yellow? Red? Blue?
@@ Line 47: / Line 47: @@
 [[Category:Comics featuring Miss Lenhart]]
-[[Category:Comics featuring Science Girl]]
+[[Category:Comics featuring Jill]]
 [[Category:Kids]] <!-- The boy is a boy and thus not adult Hairy -->
 [[Category:Physics]]