Carbon electrons will have more mass and charge than chlorine electrons
Keith S. Taber
Annie was a participant in the Understanding Chemical Bonding project. She was interviewed near the start of her college 'A level' course (equivalent to Y12). She was shown a representation of a tetrachlomethane molecule.
When Annie was asked about the diagram, she was not sure if the differently represented electrons would actually be different from each other, She suggested that perhaps electrons from different atoms would actually contain some of the particular element. Annie seemed unsure where one could tell the difference between electrons from different atoms, but her intuition seemed to tell her they should be different,
Under further questioning, Annie was able to suggests ways in which carbon electrons would be different from chlorine electrons. Most science teachers may expect it would be quite obvious that one electron is much like another one in terms of essential properties (e.g., charge, rest mass). We probably assume students will readily appreciate this, and perhaps that it is not a point that needs to be emphasised. We might expect a student would immediately reject any suggestion that electrons from different atoms should be fundamentally different.
Do you think they would be the same size, electrons from carbon and electrons from chlorine?
No.
Which ones will be bigger, do you think?
The carbon ones.
Do you think they're the same charge? The same electrical charge?
No.
(pause, c.5)
No, which one do you think will have a bigger charge?
(pause, c.2s)
The carbon.
…
Yeah, what about colour. What colour do you think they will be?
Colours. What of the actual electrons?
Mm.
Mm, (pause, c.5s) I don't think they'd really have a colour, but I think if they had to have a colour, then they'd pick out the colour from the element.
A teacher is likely to expect an A level student to appreciate that all electrons are intrinsically the same. Annie seemed to think that the electrons of different atoms were different, somehow reflecting the particular element, and open to the idea they may differ in mass and charge, and possibly even colour.
Whilst Annie's comments are at odds with canonical science, they reflect thinking that is quite common among learners who often fail to appreciate the core principle of sub-microscopic models of matter, i.e., that the emergent properties of matter at macroscopic scale are explained in terms of the different properties of the tiny particles (i.e., quanticles) from which matter is conjectured to be constituted at a much finer scale. She was not keeping clearly distinguished macroscopic properties (such as colour) and properties that sub-atomic particles could have.
