I've always wondered if there is any proportional relationship between distance on a nuclear level and distances on a planetary level...

Basically, what I'm wondering is if there is a similar amount of space around objects in space as there is around atomic particles... make sense?

I am wondering if the amount of space around objects is more related to the gravitational force an object has as well as the positive and negative properties it has? Wouldn't things stay within a range at a constant related to mass and gravity? Here is a web site that explores some of these questions.

Click here to first get an idea of the relative distances between objects in our solar system.

In an atom, however, the relative distances are far greater. Read further to find:

"Leaving aside the entirely distinct natures of the bodies and the orbits, there is a difference in relative sizes: the spaces within the atom are even larger a hundred times larger-than the spaces within the solar system!

The distance from the Sun out to Mercury is about 45 Sun-widths. But the distance from the nucleus out to the nearest electron-orbit it on the order of 5,000 nucleus-widths. (There are nuclei of various sizes.)...."

Thank you for an interesting question. I find the exercise to discover the relative sizes and distances between objects in our own solar system to be fascinating, making the comparative results for an atom mind-boggling.

Hope this helps...'fuse.

It should be pointed out that the notion of electrons circling a central nucleus at specific distances is one that has been entirely discredited by quantum mechanics. While the s, p, d, and f orbitals have a definite enough shape, they merely specify a region wherein the probablility of finding an electron is non-zero.
Strictly speaking, it is meaningless to speak of the distance of an electron from the nucleus.