but we know that electrons are in a lower energy state when they are in orbit than when they are in a neutron, (most of the time), so they have no energy incentive to collapse onto the nucleus, and in fact, they have a disincentive to do so.It all boils down to energy balance.......
Notice that I said free electrons. When electrons are orbiting an atomic nucleus, everything changes. They essentially cease to be singularities and become wave functions vibrating around the positive charge of the nucleus, which is a quite stable and happy condition for them. Furthermore, they enter matrimony and find someone of the opposite spin to pair up with, which makes them even more stable. So why don't they simply collapse in onto the nucleus and neutralize the positive charges there? No one knows the exact answer to this question, but we know that electrons are in a lower energy state when they are "in orbit" than when they are in a neutron, (most of the time), so they have no energy incentive to collapse onto the nucleus, and in fact, they have a disincentive to do so.
It all boils down to energy balance. The lower the energy state, the more likely it is to happen. I hope this helps. And if you ever figure out the quantum world, let us all know, because you will be the first!
You seem to be disturbed by the fact that electrons repel.
Yet you are not at all disturbed by the fact that when you sit on a chair, the chair pushes up on you, and doesn't let you sink through it.
It turns out, that those are EXACTLY THE SAME forces. Outermost layers of electrons of objects push each other apart upon what we think is "contact". It turns out, it is impossible for any two objects to touch.
I really cannot explain this in terms of anything else you are familiar with, because I don't understand it in terms of anything else you are more familiar with.
I do admit that your question is an excellent question...BUT!
When you ask "why" questions, you have to have some framework that you can accept to be true without questioning. Some set of fundamentals that can serve as the base-case, and that do not need an explanation of why.
OTHERWISE, you are perpetually asking "why?".
