[ChungLing]

Is there an atomic particle or specific amount of energy that determines what kind of exothermic reaction is achieved?

Example:
ExoReaction 1 - Flame
ExoReaction 2 - Electrical Current
ExoReaction 3 - Light
ExoReaction 4 - Sound

What makes this difference occur? Is it a property of the materials being used, or is it a fundamental flaw in the Atomic Model?
If I am not being clear please let me know.

I am a Sophomore in high school, so when I asked my Chemistry teacher she was speechless for almost a minute before responding with "Google". And Google does not know all, sadly :l                                                                                                                                                                                     And Google does not know all, sadly :l

[Borek]

If I am not being clear please let me know.

You are not clear, at least for me. Please elaborate.

I guess you ask why in different reactions energy evolves in different forms. Well - it doesn't matter. They are all equivalent. Using electric energy you can run a heater, lamp or drill - it all depends on how the energy is used.

I think your idea about properties is correct, but as I am not sure what the question is - I can be wrong.

[ChungLing]

You are not clear, at least for me. Please elaborate.

To clarify: What causes the difference of light and fire in an exothermic reaction? Is there a particle that causes fire, and another that causes electricity, or are the different reactions a result of higher levels of energy leaving the reaction?

So simplistically: What makes one reaction fire and the other light?

[Jorriss]

You are not clear, at least for me. Please elaborate.

To clarify: What causes the difference of light and fire in an exothermic reaction? Is there a particle that causes fire, and another that causes electricity, or are the different reactions a result of higher levels of energy leaving the reaction?

So simplistically: What makes one reaction fire and the other light?

Exothermic reactions produce heat, that's what they do.

If you have a reaction that moves ions though, it may create a potential difference driving a current. If it forms a gas in solution, it may bubble and create sound, if its extremely exothermic, it may just cause combustion or excite electrons in the system to cause light.

An exothermic reaction is a reaction that produces heat. Any other effects are secondary with consideration to that aspect.

[Borek]

What causes the difference of light and fire in an exothermic reaction?

Perhaps my English fails me, but "difference of light and fire" is meaningless to me.

Is there a particle that causes fire

No.

and another that causes electricity

No. That is, you need charged particles or molecules to observe electric current, but these are common and present in almost every reaction.

or are the different reactions a result of higher levels of energy leaving the reaction?

That would be close to reality, although reaction being an effect of energy leaving the reaction seems circular to me.

So simplistically: What makes one reaction fire and the other light?

I guess you mean "What makes one reaction produce fire and the other produce light?". But if so, the answer was already voiced in the thread - reaction produces energy, depending on amount of energy and properties of the substances we will observe either flames, or light, or just heat, if the setup is correct we will observe electric current.

[ChungLing]

I guess you mean "What makes one reaction produce fire and the other produce light?". But if so, the answer was already voiced in the thread - reaction produces energy, depending on amount of energy and properties of the substances we will observe either flames, or light, or just heat, if the setup is correct we will observe electric current.

Exothermic reactions don't just simply produce heat, some produce sound. Is there currently a feature of the model of the atom that explains why these products/energy releases are different?

I apologize for my inability to express my ideas clearly the first time, I have been told I don't do it very well.

[Borek]

Exothermic reactions don't just simply produce heat, some produce sound.

No, they produce just heat. If you observe sound that's effect of a lot of heat evolving very fast in small volume - and the sound is effect of expansion, it has nothing to do with the reaction itself.

Is there currently a feature of the model of the atom that explains why these products/energy releases are different?

See above - observed differences are not directly related to the reaction itself.

Hydrogen mixed with oxygen explodes with a loud bang. Hydrogen and oxygen - in a specially designed torch, to which they are feed separately - can burn very hot, but without any particular loud sounds. Oxygen and hydrogen feed to a fuel cell will produce water and electric current. And finally mixture of these gases can react relatively slowly and quietly on the surface of black platinum catalyst. In all these cases it is the same reaction, but different setups allow different effects. However, these different effects are just different ways in which the energy is dispersed.

I apologize for my inability to express my ideas clearly the first time, I have been told I don't do it very well.

As long as you are ready to elaborate and explain what you mean we can deal with it

[ChungLing]

No, they produce just heat. If you observe sound that's effect of a lot of heat evolving very fast in small volume - and the sound is effect of expansion, it has nothing to do with the reaction itself.

So all observed reactions are a result of heat? I can understand sound in that case. Electricity? If electricity is the result of the charge of subatomic particles, how exactly is a release of it in an exothermic reaction a result of heat?
And light, I've learned, is when the electrons move closer to the nucleus, and thus the energy released in that instance is light. How is this light released a result of heat? And how exactly does moving closer to the nucleus produce light?
Fire seems simple, but what causes the actual flame, the flame we see? Could it possibly be a combination of a temperature and a light release?

Disclaimer: I currently am running off of Bohr's Model of the Atom. Please enlighten me on any new features that I am blissfully unaware of, if it is an answer to my questions.
Also: I understand that my mind MAY explode with the revelations I receive about the atom. I have a splash mat ready...

[Borek]

So all observed reactions are a result of heat

In most cases - yes.

If electricity is the result of the charge of subatomic particles, how exactly is a release of it in an exothermic reaction a result of heat?

In many (but not all) reactions electrons have to move from one molecule (atom, ion) to another. If we can separate the reactants and force electrons to flow not directly between them, but through some external circuit, we have a battery.

And light, I've learned, is when the electrons move closer to the nucleus, and thus the energy released in that instance is light. How is this light released a result of heat? And how exactly does moving closer to the nucleus produce light?

Electrons on "lower" orbits have lower energy than those higher up. When electron goes down (jumps from the higher energy orbital to the lower energy orbital) it has to get rid of the excess energy and it emits it as a photon - electromagnetic radiation. Depending on the amount of energy involved wavelength of the photon will be different - it can be visible light of any color, it can be UV or even X-Ray.

This is not exactly energy given as heat, we can say energy was given away as light (or radiation).

As you are willing to get deeper... Exothermic reactions give energy. This energy can be in form of heat (that is, kinetic movements of molecules - the hotter the substance, the faster the molecules are), or radiation - like light. Sometimes one of the form of energy is more prevalent, sometimes the other. However, hot substances can emit radiation as well - this is so called black body radiation. While the mechanisms of emission are quite different, effect is in a way similar - you have something that radiates. If something gets hot enough it will emit visible light - that's what happens in the fire. At the same time radiation can get absorbed and the substance can get hot (that's what you see whenever Sun shines and heats up everything). So, you see, it is all connected, and while there are several mechanisms involved, they are all based on the same molecules, moving electrons and orbitals - there are no "separate particles" responsible for light, sound, fire and so on -which was starting point of the discussion.

Fire seems simple, but what causes the actual flame, the flame we see? Could it possibly be a combination of a temperature and a light release?

See above. Black body radiation is a key term in flame. If you light a candle light is generated by microscopic particles of soot heated up in flame.

It is possible to emit light without a high temperature, if we can excite atoms (molecules) so that electrons go up to higher energy orbital and the fall back, emitting light. But that's not what is happening in flame (although to some extent it is - yellow color observed in flames is often effect of the sodium atoms being excited and deexcited).

Disclaimer: I currently am running off of Bohr's Model of the Atom. Please enlighten me on any new features that I am blissfully unaware of, if it is an answer to my questions.
Also: I understand that my mind MAY explode with the revelations I receive about the atom. I have a splash mat ready...

You are trying to run before learning how to walk. It won't work. But you seem to be curious, that should get you there