The current atomic model has too much uncertainty. A science is tasked to explain things. When an explanation is based on a behavior driven by probabilities, and its measurement is uncertain, then it is not a practical explanation.
I just self-published my 6th book, titled Practical Atomic Model, providing practical explanations for atoms and their behaviors.
In 1913, Niels Bohr's atomic model defined circular orbits for an atom's electrons.
In 1916, Gilbert Lewis defined a dot structure for a simple method of managing each element's circular ring of valence electrons. Its use still continues though with known limitations.
By the 1920s, quantum mechanics introduced uncertainty claiming electrons behaved like a wave, having its position defined by probabilities.
Each element has a specific pattern for its electrons around its nucleus. These configurations are predictable. In chemistry, there is no uncertainty about those electrons. Bonding between atoms is certain given their known valence behavior in each element.
If the uncertainty principle truly applied to electrons, then chemists could not accurately predict chemical reactions accurately because of the probability electrons are not where expected. Probabilities require a margin of error for a prediction. No such error definition exists in chemistry because the electron rings have their electrons where expected.
All of the evidence supports an atom's electrons are found in a defined sequence of circular rings with each having a defined capacity of electrons.
There are 20 elements having an anomaly where an electron has moved to an adjacent circular ring in the configuration. This transfer of an electron is awkward for the quantum orbitals which are driven by probabilities and have different patterns of lobes. Circular rings having a similar radius enable such a transfer.
Chemists have used these verified electron configurations for decades.
The current atomic model seems to ignore measurements. Electrons and protons are real particles, both having a measured size and mass. The valence ring radius of each element (of the first 96) has been measured in picometers. The capacity and sequence of filling the respective circular rings of electrons are well established.
For quantum mechanics to persist in an atomic model, it requires evidence for its crucial claim that an electron location is uncertain and can be found only by probabilities.
Quantum mechanics offers the conjecture electrons move but we cannot know their location. Their position is described only by probabilities, called a wave function. Quantum mechanics must provide evidence for its claims.
These are the 4 questionable claims in the current atomic model which are lacking evidence:
1) strong force,
2) weak force,
3) atomic mass defect,
4) quantum orbitals
The strong nuclear force, or the strong interaction, is an undefined mechanism holding protons and neutrons together within an atomic nucleus. It is claimed to be 137 times stronger than electromagnetism. There is little evidence for the value of 137.
The weak nuclear force, or the weak interaction, is an undefined mechanism which ejects particles from an atomic nucleus during radioactive decay.
These 2 fundamental forces are accepted while having no definition and no evidence.
The book describes an atom's use of protons and electrons, the 2 fundamental particles. The book references the author's compilation of many of the known isotopes, including stable and radioactive. Combinations of their odd and even counts of nucleons affect the stability and radioactive decay of the atom's nucleus. The 118 elements have an atomic weight ranging from 1 to 295. These 295 are analyzed to reveal the behavior for nucleus stability driven by or odd or even counts, affected by the number of electrons attached to the protons in the nucleus.
A practical atomic model provides a better explanation of certain atomic behaviors, such as a) suggesting a new naming convention for the concentric rings of electrons to suit the actual configuration in their order from the nucleus; this new order directly helps explain the valence electrons, b) building a nucleus using protons and electrons, c) describing the steps of radioactive decay, and d) describing an atom's interactions with light.
The strong and weak forces are explained by Coulomb's force between attached charged particles. When in contact, the force is attractive becoming the strong force. If this equilibrium is disturbed then the force reverts to repulsion becoming the weak force.
The behaviors in a nucleus are driven only by Coulomb's force, not by other undefined forces being proposed and lacking evidence.
Around 2014, a collaboration of international scientists measured the radius of the nucleus of several elements. These measurements revealed a volume too small for the number of nucleons being packed for the isotope. The size of a proton is reduced during its compression by fusion into the nucleus. This is the cause of atomic mass defect, where an atomic mass is measured at less than expected.
Quantum orbitals are the proposed non-circular orbits of electrons in the d and f shells. These orbitals represent probabilities and have a number of lobes. Therefore, the higher probabilities are for the electron not to be at the outer edge of its odd path, where it must be for electron behaviors to be predictable.
The word practical is in the title because atomic behaviors need practical explanations. Electrons are real particles and are not waves of uncertainty around a nucleus and do not behave according to a person's assigned probabilities.
This book follows Practical Particle Physics which explained there are only 2 fundamental particles, electron and proton. Quarks are worthless debris from a collision of particles. Quasi-particles like a photon and graviton do not exist. There are no quarks and quasi-particles in a practical atomic model.
Attached are 4 figures from the book Practical Atomic Model.
1) The average mass per proton for each element. The mass of the atom subtracts the mass of all the electrons, both in orbit and in the nucleus where they combine to form the 2 particle combination called a neutron. The result is divided by the number of nucleons, resulting in the average mass of a proton in the nucleus.
This deviation explains the atomic mass defect, There is no mass being converted into an undefined form of energy. There is no evidence for the supposed energy from missing mass. The proton has been compressed in size causing its measured mass to decrease. There is no mass being lost.
2) Covalent radius for first 96 elements.
The size of the outer valence ring of each element has been measured with the precision of a picometer, having no stated margin of error to account for supposed probabilities affecting electron actual locations. These data provide the locations of all the electrons as a distance from the nucleus.
3) Ionization energy is the energy required to remove an electron from the outer ring.
The energy required to eject an electron from the outer valence ring of each element has been measured, having no stated margin of error to account for supposed probabilities affecting electron locations. Probabilities do not apply to the electron rings. Atomic number 2, Helium, is at the upper left of the chart.
4) New names for the circular rings. The current shells have nonconsecutive numbers for the f shells. Shell 4f is after 5p and 6s; 5f is after 6p and 7s. This naming can be confusing, when numbers should be consistently increasing.
The new ring names are in their order from the nucleus, making the outer ring's valence behavior easy to identify.
The electron configurations are measured and verified, and their names should reflect their order. Each number is the ring filling cycle number of the 7. Therefore, the ring's name has both its cycle and its capacity.
Many familiar with the periodic table know the first 2 rings have 2 electrons, from 2 b or binary rings.
Many know the next 2 cycles of rings have 8 electrons, from the combined x + b rings (6+2).
Many know the next 2 cycles of rings have 18 electrons, from the d ring (a decade or 10) inside the combined x + b rings (6+2).
Many know the next 2 cycles of rings have 32 electrons, from the f ring (having 14) inside the d ring (10) which is inside the combined x + b rings (6+2).
The known 118 elements have 19 concentric rings of electrons.
There are 7 defined cycles of filling the rings with electrons. The 1st cycle has 1 b ring; the 2nd and 3rd cycles have a set of x and b rings;
the 4th and 5th have d, x and b rings; the 6th and 7th have f, d, x and b rings.
The valence radius of first 96 elements has been measured, but Curium (96) filled to only 7d1, not completing the 6th cycle of filling rings.
After the 1st cycle, each filling cycle ends with an x and b ring pair filled for a valence of 8, noted at each inert element in group 17.
The new names follow the known, predictable configurations of electrons in circular rings around the nucleus.
Practical explanations based on the evidence are better than conjectures based on uncertainties lacking evidence.
Here is an image of the book cover. The book was self-published using KDP, so Amazon does the paperback or Kindle distribution.