© Lloyd1. _Electron Bonding is a myth
2. _The original reason electron bonding was invented was to explain the coming together and bonding of atoms.
3. _Since the charge field was not considered to be a real field, it wasn't used for this purpose.
4. _The current carrier of charge is the messenger photon, but this photon is virtual.
5. _It has no mass, no radius, and no energy.
6. _With no field to explain the bond, early particle physicists had to explain the bond with the electrons.
7. _But electron bonding has been illogical and contradictory from the beginning.
8. _We see the state of the art very quickly when we begin to read about ionic bonds: The formation of an ionic bond proceeds when the cation, whose ionization energy is low, releases some of its electrons to achieve a stable electron configuration.
9. _But wait, the ionic bond is used to explain the bonding of atoms, not ions.
10. _For instance, in the given example of NaCl, it is a Sodium atom that loses an electron to become a Sodium cation.
11. _But the Sodium atom is already stable.
12. _It doesn't need to release any of its electrons to achieve a stable configuration, because it is already stable.
13. _So what causes it to drop an electron in the presence of Chlorine? We aren't told.
14. _This problem becomes even bigger when we ask the same question for Chlorine.
15. _Has Chlorine dropped an electron to become an ion? No, we don't want Chlorine dropping electrons, we want Chlorine adding electrons.
16. _So in the beginning, Chlorine is just an atom, and as such is stable.
17. _Why should it want to borrow an electron from Sodium? We are told it is because Chlorine has an "electron affinity," but that is just a statement.
18. _In fact, Chlorine can't "want" an extra electron, because that would be a stable atom "wanting" to be unstable.
19. _That makes no sense.
20. _It is even worse if we ask for an explanation of electron affinity.
21. _The Electron Affinity of an atom or molecule is defined as the amount of energy released when an electron is added to a neutral atom or molecule to form a negative ion. But that is clearly circular.
22. _You can't define an affinity by a release of energy.
23. _The release of energy is the result. We want a cause.
24. _As a sort of answer, we are told Ionic bonding will occur only if the overall energy change for the reaction is favourable – when the reaction is exothermic.
25. _The atoms apparently have some desire to release energy.
26. _But that isn't an answer, either; it is another diversion.
27. _All that tells us is that there is a release of energy during the bond, but that energy could be released in any number of mechanical scenarios.
28. _As you will see, it happens in my scenario, which has nothing to do with electrons being shared or borrowed.
29. _So it is indication of nothing.
30. _We are told that all elements desire to become noble gases, and that this explains why atoms want to gain or lose electrons.
31. _But that is strictly illogical, and we have no evidence for it anyway.
32. _It is implied that Chlorine wants another electron to be more like Argon, but if that is true, what it really should want is another proton.
33. _Another electron won't make Chlorine into Argon, it will only make Chlorine an ion, which is unstable.
34. _Elements don't want to be ions, which is why ions take on electrons to become atoms.
35. _It is ions that want to be atoms, not the reverse.
36. _If there is any affinity, it is for having the same number of electrons and protons, as we know.
37. _Atoms have no affinity for becoming ions.
38. _Once I remind you of the fact, you can see that we have loads of evidence that atoms do not want to gain or lose electrons.
39. _It is ions that want to be atoms, not atoms that want to be ions.
40. _And it is positive ions that attract free electrons, as we know, not negative ions or atoms.
41. _Once Sodium becomes a cation, it should attract the free electron, not Chlorine.
42. _So there is no reason for Sodium to start releasing electrons just to suit theorists.
43. _There is no reason for a free electron to move from a cation to a stable atom.
44. _But there are lots of reasons for Sodium not to release electrons.
45. _free electrons do not move from cations to stable atoms.
46. _That is strictly backwards. 20th century theorists have sold you a contradiction.
47. _The anion, whose electron affinity is positive, then [supposedly] accepts the electrons, again to attain a stable electron configuration.
48. _ remind yourself that anions are given a negative sign. And so are electrons.
49. _So the theory of ionic bonding is that electrons move from plus to minus? So much for field potentials.
50. _The Na and Cl aren't ions until the electron moves over, I am told.
51. _And it moves over because Cl has more affinity for it.
52. _But that doesn't work because the Cl atom can't have more electron affinity than the Na ion.
53. _It might possibly have more affinity than the Na atom, and that is the way affinities are assigned.
54. _But the Cl atom cannot have more affinity for an electron than a Na ion.
55. _As soon as the electron is "released" by the Na, the Na is an ion.
56. _We then have the electron hovering over the Na+ and the Cl atom.
57. _Which way will it go? Are you telling me the electron will move from a cation to a neutral atom? It will move away from an open proton? Look at this diagram of the process.
58. _I have drawn the moment after the Na has released the electron, but before it is accepted by the Cl.
59. _Do you still think the electron will move to the Cl?
60. _Do you really think an atom can have more electron affinity than a cation?
61. _How could an atom be more receptive to a free electron than a cation?
62. _That goes against the definition of cation, of ion, of atom, and of field potential.
63. _ I present an explanation below that doesn't contradict the field definitions.
64. _This is not to say that elements have no affinity for one another. I will show that they do.
65. _But this affinity is has nothing to do with electrons. It has to do with charge.
66. _Elements don't want to gain or lose electrons, they want to balance the charge field around them, to gain even more nuclear stability.
67. _I now can diagram the nucleus, showing how the alphas and protons fit together to channel charge through the nucleus.
68. _charged particles are in fact recycling the charge field, by taking in charge photons at the poles and emitting them (most heavily) at the equators.
69. _They do this just like the Earth does it, though on a different scale.
70. _I draw the alphas and protons as disks seen from on-edge.
71. _This helps me to diagram without blocking your view of inner parts of the nucleus.
72. _In addition, each disk is assumed to have a hole in the middle, like a compact disk [CD].
73. _Although I still assume the protons are roughly spherical, I draw them as disks to indicate the spin and the charge emission.
74. _Because they are spinning very fast, the emission is heaviest in the equatorial plane of the sphere.
75. _Since I want to indicate the proton as an emitter of charge, this allows me to simplify the diagram into a circle rather than a sphere.
76. _The hole in the disk indicates one field potential and the equator indicates the opposite potential, since photons go in one and out the other.
77. _When we build the nucleus, we place edge to hole, to indicate positive to negative.
78. _This creates a channel through which charge can move.
79. _Because charge moves in defined and limited channels, it does not tend to dissolve the nucleus.
80. _In this way, charge is constantly expelled from the nucleus, explaining in a simple way why charge does not push protons apart.
81. _This is what has allowed me to dispense with the strong force entirely.
82. _This is the diagram of NaCl: The blues disks are alphas. The black disks are protons.
83. _All disks are spinning, and all disks have holes in the middle.
84. _The blue disks have holes that can accept alphas, which means they can accept two protons.
85. _This is why we can simply bring the two protons together to create NaCl.
86. _That link in the middle could now also be diagrammed as one blue disk, instead of two black disks.
87. _This means that hole is full, which creates a strong bond.
88. _Why is there a bond? Because the charge field is now moving through that bond, and therefore through both atoms.
89. _This particular configuration is strong for another reason, one we have studied in previous papers.
90. _Because the chain has an alpha in the hole on one end but not the other, we have a large potential difference across the molecule.
91. _The alpha is like a fan, pulling charge into the hole.
92. _Because we have a fan at one end and not the other, the charge "knows" which way to go through the chain.
93. _The charge is moving through this molecule very efficiently, which is why salt is a very good conductor.
94. _This also acts as the mechanical explanation for the polar nature of salt, which is strongly + on one end and strongly – on the other.
95. _It is the charge field that is causing the potential here, not the electrons.
96. _You have charge going in one end and out the other, so we can map potential exactly like wind.
97. _Charge IS a photon wind.
98. _Now, every proton in my diagram has an electron with it, and the alphas have two.
99. _So if we track only the electrons, it looks like single "valence" electrons are pairing up in the link.
100. _But since I have just explained the bond without mentioning electrons once, we can see that it is not electrons that create the bond.
101. _They are just along for the ride.
102. _What causes the affinity of these two atoms has nothing to do with electrons.
103. _It has to do with the unfilled holes in those outer alphas.
104. _That hole is caused by spin and by the channeling of the charge field, not by electrons.
105. _If we treat the holes as charge minima, and the charge field as a wind, the holes have very real suction.
106. _They will attract charge maxima like those single protons sticking out.
107. _Here is Born's model of the 4f electron shell [plate X, p. 149]: Look familiar?
108. _Here is my model of the 4th level of the atomic nucleus: Now, I made my models from scratch, as it were, just trying to match the Periodic Table.
109. _I was not trying to match any previous models or equations.
110. _But you can see that my carousel level, with four alphas spinning about a central alpha, matches the form of Born's 4f diagram.
111. _Is this a coincidence? No.
112. _We get a match because Born was diagramming Schrodinger's equation, and Schrodinger was matching charge data from experiments.
113. _That is, Schrodinger had no model, he had only data to match.
114. _But since he and I were matching the same data, it is no surprise we should arrive at similar models.
115. _What this means is that Schrodinger's equations are basically correct, they are just misassigned.
116. _I have said in many places that much of quantum physics is good physics, and that Schrodinger's equations are the best of the lot.
117. _But his equations are representing the charge field as channeled by the nucleus, not electron orbitals.
118. _I have shown that the foundation of electron bonding theory is composed of electrons moving away from cations and toward stable atoms.
119. _Since that is a contradiction of the field definitions, no math can save it.
120. _Electronegativity can be redefined as the charge potential surrounding a given atom.
121. _Atoms create currents in the field around them, as well as signature charge densities in that field, which other passing atoms must respond to.
122. _And, as current theory admits, this charge field is a function not only of the atoms present, but of the particular charge field present.
123. _The charge field can be affected by other things than just the local atoms, such as ambient E/M fields.
124. _But I can already tell you the main cause of electronegativity, a cause that current theory is totally ignorant of because they have no nuclear diagram.
125. _The main cause of electronegativity is the proton configuration in the outer shell.
126. _That's right, it has nothing to do with electrons or electron shells, since electrons don't orbit the nucleus to begin with.
127. _Because the proton configuration varies greatly, even from period to period, it won't follow a tight pattern across the Periodic Table.
128. _Nuclei aren't built by mathematical rules, they are built by structural rules, the main structural rule being stability.
129. _Each element seeks the most stability at that number, and the only way to discover the stability is know the structure.
130. _In other words, you have to know how the nuclei are built.
131. _You have to know that there are eight holes in the 4th level, for instance.
132. _You have to know how many protons each hole can take (it varies from period to period), so that you know how full or how empty each hole is.
133. _And you have to know how the position of the hole in the nucleus will cause it to act, as a matter of spin and angular momentum.
134. _For this, you must have a diagram. No general equation will work.
135. _I suggest you look at my diagram and analysis of Mercury to see how this works in practice.
136. _Of course we can build math to fit the structure after the fact, but we have to know the structure first.
137. _We get the math from the structure, not the structure from the math.
138. _My theory and diagrams also explain how things like affinity and electronegativity are communicated between atoms.
139. _Without a physical charge field as I have defined it, there is no way atoms can communicate affinities or electronegativities across free space.
140. _For instance, in the example above, how does Sodium know Chlorine is near, so that it may [supposedly] release electrons?
141. _In my field mechanics, such things are easily explained, since the charge field is composed of real photons with real mass, radius, spin and energy.
142. _I have already shown in a series of papers that real charge photons can and must be fit into the unified field equations, and I have shown you how to do it with real math.
143. _To read more about the death of electron orbital theory, you may now read my newest paper on Methane, where I show how to create the molecule with no talk of electrons.