Can atoms share electrons?

[Moonshane]

I am a complete novice but read a little and understand (possibly erroneously) that the electons 'in' atoms are effectively everywhere and nowhere at the same time?

Assuming I have got this correct (please tell me if I have - maybe it's just everywhere and nowehere in the sense that Schrodinger's cat can be both alive and dead) is it possible theoretically that an electron can be in one atom and another atom simultaneously?

I'd love to understand why or why not - either way is great!

Bear in mind I am honestly a novice so complex answers will possibly make my brain melt!

Cheers

Shane

[ronin]

Think in chemistry it is called covalent bonding, for real sharing look at a benzine molecule.

Schrodiners cat was not the simple idea of in a box out of sight you do not know if it is dead or alive, it concerns the probability of a radioactive decay hitting a sensor. If the decay was sensed then the cat got it from another mechanism. The live/dead cat was simply a way of saying at any time there was a probability of the radioactive decay being detected. Read the whole thing not just a select part.

[Alastair Rae]

As I understand it, an electron could be anywhere but not with equal probability. At any instant there's a sort of contour map of the universe showing where it might be. In a single atom, there is a high probability that "its" electrons are still nearby. When two atoms are chemically bonded, an electron could be near to either with similar levels of probablity. In simple terms their electrons are likely to be swarming around both nuclei.

[George Jones]

As ronin and Alastair Rae have noted, atoms in molecules share electron via covalent bonds. An example is molecular hydrogen. A single hydrogen atom has one electron, and a hydrogen molecule consists of two hydrogen atoms that share the two electrons. If you add some energy, you can remove one of the electrons, resulting in a molecule in which the two hydrogen atoms share the one remaining electron.

[E621Keith]

Don't forget metals. Basically atoms floating in a sea of loose electrons.

[Moonshane]

As I understand it, an electron could be anywhere but not with equal probability. At any instant there's a sort of contour map of the universe showing where it might be. In a single atom, there is a high probability that "its" electrons are still nearby. When two atoms are chemically bonded, an electron could be near to either with similar levels of probablity. In simple terms their electrons are likely to be swarming around both nuclei.

thanks Alastair

I think that's the answer I was after; in a sense a physics rather than a chemistry question. rephrased my question was could the same electron be in two places at the same time and be considered the electron of gold atom A and the electron of gold atom B. the answer must be no and to find out you'd need to 'disturb' the electron and affect its position anyway?

it's amazing what I think about when having a shave!

[Andymarrison]

Shane, if you want to delve a little deeper into the weirdness of quantum mechanics, and how it relates to "real world" observations like light reflecting off a mirror or refracting through a lens (important to all of us on here!) then there's a brilliant little book by Richard Feynman called "QED - the strange theory of light and matter".

[RikM]

In covalent bonding electrons are shared equally. With ionic bonding such as sodium and chlorine combining to form table salt, the electrons are still shared but it is strongly weighted one way. The old way of looking at it would be that the sodium has lost an electron and the chlorine gained it. Actually it is is shared, just the vast majority of time the chlorine (now a chloride ion) has it.

[ollypenrice]

Think in chemistry it is called covalent bonding, for real sharing look at a benzine molecule.

Schrodiners cat was not the simple idea of in a box out of sight you do not know if it is dead or alive, it concerns the probability of a radioactive decay hitting a sensor. If the decay was sensed then the cat got it from another mechanism. The live/dead cat was simply a way of saying at any time there was a probability of the radioactive decay being detected. Read the whole thing not just a select part.

I'm surprised by this. I thought that Schroedinger's point in the thought experiment was to force a link between the uncertainties in the micro world and the blunt alternatives of the macro world. In the quantum world the particle can decay and not decay until observed, but in the macro world the cat cannot (or can it?? ) be alive and dead, and it's aliveness or deadness does not, in macro world experience, seem to depend on whether or not we open the box. So I always took Schroedinger to be saying that observing or not observing the decay in the micro world is one thing, but linking it to the macro world via the machanism in the box produces a situation which we find hard to accept. He wasn't that keen on it himself if I recall; 'I don't like it, all this jumping, and I wish I'd never got involved in it!' (Makes me chuckle every time!)

Like Shane I'm an amateur in all this.

Olly