17 Comments

I'm surprised you forgot the third, equally fast Mercury, who famously said:

"I'm a shooting star leaping through the sky

Like a tiger, defying the laws of gravity

I'm a racing car passing by, like Lady Godiva

I'm gonna go, go, go there's no stopping me"

Expand full comment

You're right. Shame on me! Freddie was the BEST Mercury of all.

I'll do a rewrite in a few years to address this.

Expand full comment

The other Mercuries bite the dust.

Expand full comment

Here, listen to this:

https://youtu.be/tZkouut-9RQ

Expand full comment

Compared to Freddie, everyone rides the slow bus.

Expand full comment

The real bite. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE

Expand full comment

Hey, Andrew, are you a physicist?

I like these posts, keep them coming.

Expand full comment

I'm not! I've just enjoyed physics ever since I was a kid, and so I gravitated toward a heavy STEM load early on. That carried me through lots of math (Calculus in HS and then a little more in college), and after college I just kept reading books and watching documentaries and such, just remaining curious about how everything worked. The universe is endlessly fascinating, and I really love thinking about it with other folks.

Expand full comment

Well, it's cool you post these...I love talking quantum theory and relativity with people, so these are great!

Expand full comment

Yay! Don't go anywhere. I'll have more. :)

Expand full comment

This just upped my understanding of the world a bit more. It is interesting how the names interconnect. Despite being closer to the Sun it's also amazing how Mercury is cooler than its hot passionate neighbour Venus which from what I know is hotter because it's "full of gas".

One fact I would point out though is how everytime one eats fish, one might possibly be taking in mercury, especially the bigger fish. It's not a good thought but it's true nonetheless.

Thank you for sharing your facts and explaining it with us.

Expand full comment

Quite true about mercury being ingested, and that's definitely a problem we need to address. I already wrote about gold in our poop, so don't tempt me!

Expand full comment

Great analysis. But I need some help. I understand your analysis with regards to mercury and Einstein's theory through motion. But I'm lost about mercury as liquid in relation to the law of relativity, because motion doesn't seem to be involved on a face value.

Expand full comment

Adetokunbo, this is all about the speed of the electrons. They go so fast that relativity has to be invoked in order to properly calculate their orbits! That explains why they don't want to bond with other atoms (EG, become solid), whereas using Newtonian calculations does not explain why mercury is a liquid.

Expand full comment

Great article, Andrew and interesting question Adentokunbo. From my reading, it seems speed is a factor but not the whole story. The nucleus of Mercury is large enough to pull electrons in and cause them to move at relativistic speeds which orbit at "close" distances. Because they are moving so close to the massive nucleus and are moving at "relativistic" speeds, that means they act as though they are more massive. Relativity tells us that objects moving close to the speed of light act as though they have a mass greater than their true mass.

But the real cause is that mercury has a filled 6s shell meaning it can't gain or lose electrons easily. That makes it resistant to forming chemical bonds with its own atoms, keeping them far enough apart to remain a liquid at room temperatures.

Gold and Thallium are directly next to Mercury on the periodic table, and hence have similar numbers of protons and electrons, yet are solids at room temperatures. Both Gold and Thallium have massive nuclei and experience relativistic effects on electrons, but it's the structure of the electrons in their orbital rings that is the real cause of being a solid or liquid at room temperatures.

The 6s orbital in Gold is only half full, and can then participate in metal-metal bonding with itself. Thallium has a filled 6s orbital but a lone 6p electron, which orbits farther from the nucleus than 6s electrons, and is hence fairly reactive and participates in metal-metal bonding.

Here is a link to my source explaining a little more detail:

https://sciencenotes.org/why-is-mercury-a-liquid-at-room-temperature/

And here is a chart that explains electron orbital rings: https://mungfali.com/post/FF10BA664DD5A43CDDFD937A674833FBED0AA1C1/Orbital+Subshell+Chart

Expand full comment

This is excellent, Jacob! Thank you for adding some additional nuance and a more comprehensive explanation.

Expand full comment

Even when don't understand the science of your words, I drool over your images.

Expand full comment