Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #573806 > unrolled thread
| Started by | carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-01-20 15:21 -0800 |
| Last post | 2022-03-03 10:48 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 56 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-20 15:21 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-01-20 19:22 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-01-20 22:03 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-21 10:22 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-23 11:27 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-01-23 12:48 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-23 13:42 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-01-24 10:51 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-31 09:39 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-31 11:30 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-31 13:48 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-01-31 22:21 +0000
Re: Quantum mechanics thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-31 14:56 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-01 15:16 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-09 11:27 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-10 11:04 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-10 20:00 +0000
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 10:53 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 19:26 +0000
Re: Quantum mechanics Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 11:40 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 19:57 +0000
Re: Quantum mechanics Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 12:22 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 11:59 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-11 15:16 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-12 13:38 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-12 22:51 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-02-13 06:42 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-13 11:05 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-01-23 16:27 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-23 16:46 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-01-23 16:34 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-01-24 01:38 +0100
Re: Quantum mechanics thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-01-23 17:12 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-01-23 23:01 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-01-24 06:03 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-15 13:02 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-16 10:32 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-16 18:36 +0000
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-16 11:45 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-17 10:18 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-18 12:22 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-18 20:47 +0000
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-18 12:57 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-18 21:07 +0000
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-18 13:17 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-18 22:35 +0000
Re: Quantum mechanics thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-18 15:04 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-19 00:46 +0000
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-18 17:30 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-20 10:30 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-20 10:32 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-20 17:27 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-21 10:35 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-23 13:05 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-02-26 11:44 -0800
Re: Quantum mechanics thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-03-03 10:48 -0800
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-11 19:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <su6f2v$75m$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #576840 |
Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, 11 February 2022 at 20:26:59 UTC+1, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: >> carl eto <carleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 12:00:27 PM UTC-8, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>>> What trauma happened to you between 1994 and now? >>>> -- >>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>> >>> >>> Instead of being insulting why do you not say something pertinent to the post. >> Because, “carl”, since you are not well upstairs and this impedes your >> ability to absorb new information > > And when someone doesn't want to listen to a > poor idiot woodworker and absorb his incredible > wisdom - he deserves nothing. > Well if he doesn’t want to listen to anything I say, why would I offer it to him anyway? Geez, you’re dense. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-11 12:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <cf05aaf2-5395-46df-abbd-9ae95dc6b787n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #576845 |
On Friday, 11 February 2022 at 20:57:23 UTC+1, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Friday, 11 February 2022 at 20:26:59 UTC+1, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > >> carl eto <carleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 12:00:27 PM UTC-8, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > >>> > >>>> What trauma happened to you between 1994 and now? > >>>> -- > >>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >>> > >>> > >>> Instead of being insulting why do you not say something pertinent to the post. > >> Because, “carl”, since you are not well upstairs and this impedes your > >> ability to absorb new information > > > > And when someone doesn't want to listen to a > > poor idiot woodworker and absorb his incredible > > wisdom - he deserves nothing. > > > Well if he doesn’t want to listen to anything I say, why would I offer it > to him anyway? And why do you, poor halfbrain? Your Shit has trained you for a task, and you do the task.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-11 11:59 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e3dea044-400b-4b7d-9325-96305ec63b5en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #576838 |
On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 11:26:59 AM UTC-8, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > carl eto <carleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 12:00:27 PM UTC-8, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >> What trauma happened to you between 1994 and now? > >> -- > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > > > Instead of being insulting why do you not say something pertinent to the post. > Because, “carl”, since you are not well upstairs and this impedes your > ability to absorb new information, there is no real point in responding to > your posts. People who are not consistently lucid are not invited to > sustained conversations that require lucidity. > > Are you all out of answers? Maybe you can go to another physics site and ask for help. > > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, table On the contrary
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-11 15:16 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6206EE38.6B5C@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #576838 |
Odd Bodkin wrote: > > carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 12:00:27 PM UTC-8, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >> What trauma happened to you between 1994 and now? > >> -- > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > > > Instead of being insulting why do you not say something pertinent to the post. > > Because, carl, since you are not well upstairs and this impedes your > ability to absorb new information, there is no real point in responding to > your posts. People who are not consistently lucid are not invited to > sustained conversations that require lucidity. > > > Are you all out of answers? Maybe you can go to another physics site and ask for help. > > > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Let's see... you are not well upstairs impedes your ability to absorb no real point in responding not consistently lucid not invited to sustained conversations that require lucidity. That sounds like the talk of The Odd Bodkin I know.... Why don't you just say what you really feel? you bully you. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-12 13:38 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <620828D0.5B62@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #576870 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > > carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 12:00:27 PM UTC-8, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >> What trauma happened to you between 1994 and now? > > >> -- > > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > > > > > > Instead of being insulting why do you not say something pertinent to the post. > > > > Because, carl, since you are not well upstairs and this impedes your > > ability to absorb new information, there is no real point in responding to > > your posts. People who are not consistently lucid are not invited to > > sustained conversations that require lucidity. > > > > > Are you all out of answers? Maybe you can go to another physics site and ask for help. > > > > > > > -- > > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Let's see... > > you are not well upstairs > impedes your ability > to absorb > no real point in responding > not consistently lucid > not invited > to > sustained conversations > that require lucidity. > > That sounds like the talk of The Odd Bodkin I know.... > > Why don't you just say what you really feel? > > you bully you. Let me explain... this is carl eto's Home. It's his sandbox. He doesn't need...invitation. And certaintly not to have sand thrown in his face... this is his HOME. this is hs space.. and you go into his space his home his sandbox and throw sand in his face and tell him he is not invited.. YOU ARE A BULLY!!! I will not have it. I will not look the other way. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-12 22:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6208AA8D.89B@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #576943 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > > > > carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 12:00:27 PM UTC-8, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > >> What trauma happened to you between 1994 and now? > > > >> -- > > > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of being insulting why do you not say something pertinent to the post. > > > > > > Because, carl, since you are not well upstairs and this impedes your > > > ability to absorb new information, there is no real point in responding to > > > your posts. People who are not consistently lucid are not invited to > > > sustained conversations that require lucidity. > > > > > > > Are you all out of answers? Maybe you can go to another physics site and ask for help. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > Let's see... > > > > you are not well upstairs > > impedes your ability > > to absorb > > no real point in responding > > not consistently lucid > > not invited > > to > > sustained conversations > > that require lucidity. > > > > That sounds like the talk of The Odd Bodkin I know.... > > > > Why don't you just say what you really feel? > > > > you bully you. > > Let me explain... > > this is carl eto's Home. > > It's his sandbox. He doesn't need...invitation. > > And certaintly not to have sand thrown in his face... > > this is his HOME. > > this is hs space.. > > and you go into > his space > his home > his > sandbox > and throw sand in his face > and tell him he is not invited.. > > YOU ARE A BULLY!!! > > I will not have it. > > I will not look the other way. I'm not talking about just a ...bully, I'm talking about a ...serial bully. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-13 06:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e5c9f41a-9738-47f0-9029-0816fab25d53n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #576971 |
On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 10:51:39 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote: > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > > > > > > carl eto <carleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 12:00:27 PM UTC-8, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> What trauma happened to you between 1994 and now? > > > > >> -- > > > > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of being insulting why do you not say something pertinent to the post. > > > > > > > > Because, carl, since you are not well upstairs and this impedes your > > > > ability to absorb new information, there is no real point in responding to > > > > your posts. People who are not consistently lucid are not invited to > > > > sustained conversations that require lucidity. > > > > > > > > > Are you all out of answers? Maybe you can go to another physics site and ask for help. > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > > > Let's see... > > > > > > you are not well upstairs > > > impedes your ability > > > to absorb > > > no real point in responding > > > not consistently lucid > > > not invited > > > to > > > sustained conversations > > > that require lucidity. > > > > > > That sounds like the talk of The Odd Bodkin I know.... > > > > > > Why don't you just say what you really feel? > > > > > > you bully you. > > > > Let me explain... > > > > this is carl eto's Home. > > > > It's his sandbox. He doesn't need...invitation. > > > > And certaintly not to have sand thrown in his face... > > > > this is his HOME. > > > > this is hs space.. > > > > and you go into > > his space > > his home > > his > > sandbox > > and throw sand in his face > > and tell him he is not invited.. > > > > YOU ARE A BULLY!!! > > > > I will not have it. > > > > I will not look the other way. > I'm not talking about just a ...bully, > > I'm talking about a ...serial bully. > -- > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge > the unchallengeable. And your sister!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-13 11:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <62095666.5247@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #576971 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > > > > > > carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 12:00:27 PM UTC-8, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> What trauma happened to you between 1994 and now? > > > > >> -- > > > > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of being insulting why do you not say something pertinent to the post. > > > > > > > > Because, carl, since you are not well upstairs and this impedes your > > > > ability to absorb new information, there is no real point in responding to > > > > your posts. People who are not consistently lucid are not invited to > > > > sustained conversations that require lucidity. > > > > > > > > > Are you all out of answers? Maybe you can go to another physics site and ask for help. > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > > > Let's see... > > > > > > you are not well upstairs > > > impedes your ability > > > to absorb > > > no real point in responding > > > not consistently lucid > > > not invited > > > to > > > sustained conversations > > > that require lucidity. > > > > > > That sounds like the talk of The Odd Bodkin I know.... > > > > > > Why don't you just say what you really feel? > > > > > > you bully you. > > > > Let me explain... > > > > this is carl eto's Home. > > > > It's his sandbox. He doesn't need...invitation. > > > > And certaintly not to have sand thrown in his face... > > > > this is his HOME. > > > > this is hs space.. > > > > and you go into > > his space > > his home > > his > > sandbox > > and throw sand in his face > > and tell him he is not invited.. > > > > YOU ARE A BULLY!!! > > > > I will not have it. > > > > I will not look the other way. > > I'm not talking about just a ...bully, > > I'm talking about a ...serial bully. more like a predatorial serial bully... -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-01-23 16:27 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b8ddc7a1-9209-4506-8fd3-3a2244cd8881n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #574154 |
On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 11:27:04 AM UTC-8, carl eto wrote: > "The wave-train is the distance." > This is statement is difficult to decipher but I am assuming that you mean the probability waves that are used to form the wave packets from the first to the last wave packet, in the representation of the propagation of light, depicts the distance propagated; henceforth, you are concurring with my statement, jolly good. > "Complex conjugates, keep the entire action, or, are half the action." > Sorry, but this statement is false since the complex conjugate is a mathematical operator that eliminates positive vectors using positive vectors since a position probability is always positive, ol chap. > "... a position probability cannot depict a negative value > that is required in representing destructive wave interference ...", > > here also is in the sense where under the conjugate, > is what results why that is so - according to probability. > Sorry my dear friend Ross but it is still not so since positive vectors cannot cancel but if you can find an example where it does I am all open ears since I have been wrong before and I will certainly be wrong until the day I die but hopefully something good will come out of it so anyways it was a good try. > It is Rayleigh and Rayleigh Jeans, then Compton, I think here > you are saying if it is Rayleigh or Rayleigh Jeans, here that > it is Rayleigh, Jeans, Compton, Debye, Maxwell. > Can't seem to get a hold of this last statement but it must have been some good whiskey that you got a hold of ol boy. I suggest some Johnny Walker blue for a good man as your self and Rayliegh, Compton and Debye says cheers to you! Yeah that's about the point that the complex have non-real components, most of the time in interpretation that complex parts don't themselves have a meaningful value, here when "their differece is zero, these conjugates what together are balanced as about the usual linear Hermitian conjugate, beyond that they are balanced with a well-defined interpretation their difference is zero, with, not-a-well-defined interpretation". https://quantummechanics.ucsd.edu/ph130a/130_notes/node133.html Rayleigh-Jeans, Compton, Maxwell in the middle, then Debye, Airy, Young, ... basically reflects that electrons are massy and charged while photons are massless and chargeless, but that all due their wavelength, and energy, the few functions same for them work out as linear, but, in reality they have different complex components, which makes for why there are basically various systems, to get figured out, in terms of electrical current, and the photon sector. (That electrons go <=c and photons go >= c.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-01-23 16:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <10ab4d1e-b9dc-498f-ae88-b628cbce079en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #574188 |
A position probability of a photon or electron is zero or some positive between 0 and one. Zero being not there and, .2 or 20% chance of the photon or electron being at that specific position; consequently, probably waves cannot depict wave interference since wave interference of a probability wave requires a negative value that is the foundation of the wave theory where quantum mechanics is also a wave theory. Quantum mechanic is a wave theory ol boy which resulted in the complex conjugate, jolly good of them but the result of the complex conjugate is the cancellation of positive vectors which is bloody mathematically invalid at least that what I would say. What about you does it strike you as a little bitty bit odd what they are doing, Cheereo and all that my good and trusty friend. Love hearing from you again and give a good and meaningful kiss to your lovely wife, for me and a nice pat on the head and kind word to your dog.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-01-23 16:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a725ea91-342a-4cfe-9436-95cae35feb40n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #573898 |
On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 10:22:03 AM UTC-8, carl eto wrote: > On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 10:03:53 PM UTC-8, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > "Quantum mechanics uses Planck's black-body radiation, which reflects how hot > > things are, "to build the Maxwell shells in the model where standing wave finds up > > this formalism". > > > > "The wave-train is the distance." > > > > Complex conjugates, keep the entire action, or, are half the action. > > > > "... a position probability cannot depict a negative value > > that is required in representing destructive wave interference ...", > > here also is in the sense where under the conjugate, > > is what results why that is so - according to probability. > > > > It is Rayleigh and Rayleigh Jeans, then Compton, I think here > > you are saying if it is Rayleigh or Rayleigh Jeans, here that > > it is Rayleigh, Jeans, Compton, Debye, Maxwell. > > > > I really hope you wrote all that because if it's plagiarism I'd feel terrible. > ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > > > This is quite nice dear Ross since have said sometime in a logic manner and because of that I will analyses each word of your statement but not all in one day. First starting with your first sentence, > you state: > "Quantum mechanics uses Planck's black-body radiation, which reflects how hot > things are, "to build the Maxwell shells in the model where standing wave finds up > this formalism". > I will have to restate your statement to clarify it: > "Quantum mechanics uses Planck's black-body radiation, which reflects how hot > things are, where Planck quantizes Maxwell's electromagnetic field using resonating electromagnetic standing waves that are formed within the black body" > > In your original statement you say that the standing wave is a model but Planck derives an equation that depicts the energy of a photon (e = hv) using the electromagnetic standing waves; therefore, the standing wave structure is not a model but is being used to depict the structure of light. This is extremely important concept since later you may use the argument that a certain structure adequacy is attributed to the model or analogy and it therefore allowable. > > Do you accept that Planck's electromagnetic standing wave is a depiction of the structure of a photon? > > Here is what happens when you use a model to derive an equation that represent the structure of energy of the entity the model or analogy is representing. In the case of Planck's standing waves, the standing waves are based on acoustical standing wave analogy (model), the problem becomes using the acoustical model to derive an energy equation will result in the described energy equation with physically constants of acoustic which has absolutely nothing structurally to do with light. In other words, physicists need to stop pretending (imaginary) both literally and physically, an get real. Because to arrive at a complex conjugate, the mathematical objects, after that it reflects for the classical and potential fields, involves an intepretation of the one side and the other, that are to reconcile: is that what results zero, could still have many usual power terms ignored, because a usual normalization, may or may not result after a usual truncation in terms, that the following don't necessarily agree, in order and even in units. I.e. that can help explain why the formula that physics offers: actually requires knowing how it works and was arrived at underneath, in the derivation in the attachment of physical to mathematical interpretation. I.e. the dynamics of it all, or resonant as it were, basically only say "there's a vector field with a zero vector in the middle".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-01-24 01:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sskse0$1r1k$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #574190 |
Ross A. Finlayson wrote: ... > Because to arrive at a complex conjugate, the mathematical objects, after > that it reflects for the classical and potential fields, involves an intepretation > of the one side and the other, that are to reconcile: is that what results zero, > could still have many usual power terms ignored, because a usual normalization, > may or may not result after a usual truncation in terms, that the following don't > necessarily agree, in order and even in units. > > I.e. that can help explain why the formula that physics offers: actually requires > knowing how it works and was arrived at underneath, in the derivation in the > attachment of physical to mathematical interpretation. I.e. the dynamics of it > all, or resonant as it were, basically only say "there's a vector field with a zero > vector in the middle". You definitely abandoned any willing of making sense, right Ross?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-01-23 17:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c29e14a7-779a-40a0-9669-d5847fcdffcdn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #574191 |
On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 4:38:27 PM UTC-8, Python wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > ... > > Because to arrive at a complex conjugate, the mathematical objects, after > > that it reflects for the classical and potential fields, involves an intepretation > > of the one side and the other, that are to reconcile: is that what results zero, > > could still have many usual power terms ignored, because a usual normalization, > > may or may not result after a usual truncation in terms, that the following don't > > necessarily agree, in order and even in units. > > > > I.e. that can help explain why the formula that physics offers: actually requires > > knowing how it works and was arrived at underneath, in the derivation in the > > attachment of physical to mathematical interpretation. I.e. the dynamics of it > > all, or resonant as it were, basically only say "there's a vector field with a zero > > vector in the middle". > You definitely abandoned any willing of making sense, right Ross? Now Python, you lay off of Ross he is a good friend of mine and trying his best. Why, don't you tally ho to the ISS question and give it a good tug there ol chap since you seem to think you are one of the knights of the round table ready to save the world. So run along now, jolly surely now would be a good time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-01-23 23:01 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3962fca5-05ff-46a1-8b21-b08bbd29d99en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #574191 |
On Monday, 24 January 2022 at 01:38:27 UTC+1, Python wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > ... > > Because to arrive at a complex conjugate, the mathematical objects, after > > that it reflects for the classical and potential fields, involves an intepretation > > of the one side and the other, that are to reconcile: is that what results zero, > > could still have many usual power terms ignored, because a usual normalization, > > may or may not result after a usual truncation in terms, that the following don't > > necessarily agree, in order and even in units. > > > > I.e. that can help explain why the formula that physics offers: actually requires > > knowing how it works and was arrived at underneath, in the derivation in the > > attachment of physical to mathematical interpretation. I.e. the dynamics of it > > all, or resonant as it were, basically only say "there's a vector field with a zero > > vector in the middle". > You definitely abandoned any willing of making sense, right Ross? Right, he did. That's how messing with common sense ends, Python.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-01-24 06:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4c30363a-7575-4eed-9c9b-9afb485003f5n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #574212 |
On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 11:01:05 PM UTC-8, maluw...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, 24 January 2022 at 01:38:27 UTC+1, Python wrote: > > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > ... > > > Because to arrive at a complex conjugate, the mathematical objects, after > > > that it reflects for the classical and potential fields, involves an intepretation > > > of the one side and the other, that are to reconcile: is that what results zero, > > > could still have many usual power terms ignored, because a usual normalization, > > > may or may not result after a usual truncation in terms, that the following don't > > > necessarily agree, in order and even in units. > > > > > > I.e. that can help explain why the formula that physics offers: actually requires > > > knowing how it works and was arrived at underneath, in the derivation in the > > > attachment of physical to mathematical interpretation. I.e. the dynamics of it > > > all, or resonant as it were, basically only say "there's a vector field with a zero > > > vector in the middle". > > You definitely abandoned any willing of making sense, right Ross? > Right, he did. That's how messing with common sense ends, Python. No, normalization is re-de-normalization, and there are various interpretations attached to model objects, there is more than particle/wave duality with some wave/state duality,if you don't know that, much of it is the output of undergraduate physics classes, and introductory ones at that. The massive dearth of scientific literacy these days it's poor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-15 13:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dad972e9-29e9-4802-8821-253e4e359ddan@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #573806 |
On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:21:18 PM UTC-8, carl eto wrote: > Quantum mechanics use Planck's black body derivation of the energy element (hγ) that represents the quantization of Maxwell's electromagnetic field but Planck's derivation is based on the black body surface electrons oscillating an ether that motion forms electromagnetic standing waves that are used to quantize Maxwell's electromagnetic field yet the black body radiation effect forms in vacuum that is void of an ether, composed of matter, and an expanding electromagnetic field cannot sustain the particle structure of a propagating photon. Furthermore, the quantum mechanics wave packets are used to represent a wave propagation mechanism of light using wave packets that are formed by the superpositioning (interference) of photon position probability waves but only the first and last wave packets are used the represent the propagation of light yet a series of wave packets are formed between the initial and last wave packets that represents the distance propagated. All of the photons are distributed between the first and last wave packets yet the wave packet mechanism is implying that the photons are concentrated within the first and last wave packets. A photon probability wave represents the possible position of a photon; consequently, the photons are distributed along the entire length between the first and last wave packet; henceforth, a photon probability wave cannot be used to represent the propagation of light because the photon position probability depicts the photons' position uncertainty which protons have a equal probability to exist anywhere in the interval of propagation; consequently, a position uncertainty cannot be used to depict a propagation mechanism of light. Furthermore, a photon probability waves that are used to construct the wave packets can only represent a positive value or zero since the photon probability depicts the possible position of a photon; consequently, a position probability cannot depict a negative value that is required in representing destructive wave interference used to construct the wave packets since the minimum value of a photon position probability is zero. Schrödinger's complex conjugate is used to represent destructive wave interference of the photon probability waves (Schrödinger, p. 1066) but the result of the complex conjugate is the cancellation of positive vectors which is mathematically invalid and nullifies the quantum mechanics wave packet propagation mechanism of light. Davisson–Gerber (1927) electron diffraction experiment is used to justify wave interference using interfering electron matter waves but the destruction of electrons, using electron wave interference, to form the non-electron fringes of the electron diffraction pattern represents the arbitrary destruction of electrons. > > > > .................................................................................................................................... > > > > The derivation of Schrödinger's photon energy equation is described. de Broglie's electron matter wave is used to represent the structure of the Bohr atom (fig 23) but the circular atomic electron matter wave contained in a circular path, around a nucleus, cannot be represented in a rectangular, cylindrical or spherical coordinate system. Schrodinger takes Bohr's circular electron matter wave and flattens the wave into a straighten electromagnetic wave then places the straighten axis electromagnetic wave into a hypothetical box allowing the electromagnetic wave to resonate, within a box, forming an electromagnetic standing wave which depicts Schrödinger transformation of the Bohr atomic electron matter wave into a particle-in-a-box electromagnetic standing wave (fig 24) depicted with Schrödinger's wave equation using a rectangular coordinate system, > > > > > > -(h2/2m)∇"Ψ( x,y,z) + V(x,y,z) + V(x,y,z)Ψ(x,y,z) = EΨ(x,y,z).....................81 > > > > A solution to Schrödinger's wave equation is represented with the wave function, > > > > Ψ = Σ c u exp[(2πEt/h + θ)i]............(Schrodinger, p. 1065).........................2 > > > > "The wave-function physical means and determines a continuous distribution of electricity in space, the fluctuations of which determine the radiation by laws of ordinary electrodynamics." (Schrödinger, Abstract). > > "The fluctuation of the charge will be governed by the Eq. 28, applied to the special case of the hydrogen atom. To find the radiation, that by electrodynamics will originate from these fluctuating charges, we have simply to calculate the rectangular components of the total electric moment by multiplying (28) by x, y, z respectively, then integrating over space, e.g." (Schrodinger, p. 1066). > > "the frequency v will be given by v= E/h....................(11) , h being Planck's constant. Thus the well known universal relation between energy and frequency is arrived at in a rather simple and unforced" (Schrödinger, p. 1056). > > > Schrödinger's wave function (equ 82) is a solution to Schrodinger's normalized wave equation. The transition of Schrodinger's normalized electromagnetic standing wave, depicted with the wave function, to a lower energy level results in the emission of a photon that energy is represented with Schrodinger's photon energy equation (hv) (Schrödinger, p. 1056) but Schrodinger's photon energy equation (hv) represents the units of the kinetic energy (kg m2 / s2) yet a photon is mass-less, and, an expanding electromagnetic field cannot maintain the particle structure of a propagating electromagnetic photon. > > > ................................................................................................................................... > > > A solution to Schrödinger's wave equation is the wave function (equ 82) represented with, > > > > -(h2/2m)∇"Ψ + U(r, θ, φ) )Ψ(r, θ, φ) = EΨ(r, θ, φ)...................................83 > > > > The normalization of the Bohr's atomic matter wave depicted with Schrodinger's wave equation (equ 81) eliminates the atomic nucleus yet Schrodinger's wave function (equ 83) is used to derive the equations of the atomic orbitals which is physically invalid since the atomic orbitals, derived using Schrodinger’s normalized wave equation, does not include the nucleus where the box replaces the nucleus. Also,..................... .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-16 10:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <aa8a69af-6f9f-42f1-b01e-da428541158dn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #577227 |
There is a somatic problem that arises in the derivation of the equations of the atomic orbital but first we must understand the real purpose of quantum mechanics is to derive the equations of the atomic orbital which depicts the conquest of the atom on theoretical terms. The rest of quantum mechanics is subterfuge and fluff since anyone that has taken quantum mechanics is a college course has problem forgotten also if not everything about it. Now, let examine what is going on where the Schrodinger wave function depicts a plane wave yet physicists use a spherical coordinate system to depict Schrodinger's wave equations which is outlandish since a spherical coordinate system is mutually exclusive to a plane wave equation. What is a plane wave equation. WELL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-16 18:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sujg7i$1ql7$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #577300 |
carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: > There is a somatic problem that arises in the derivation of the equations > of the atomic orbital but first we must understand the real purpose of > quantum mechanics is to derive the equations of the atomic orbital which > depicts the conquest of the atom on theoretical terms. The rest of > quantum mechanics is subterfuge and fluff since anyone that has taken > quantum mechanics is a college course has problem forgotten also if not > everything about it. Now, let examine what is going on where the > Schrodinger wave function depicts a plane wave yet physicists use a > spherical coordinate system to depict Schrodinger's wave equations which > is outlandish since a spherical coordinate system is mutually exclusive > to a plane wave equation. What is a plane wave equation. WELL > This is not one of your better days. Do you recognize that when it happens? What do you do to stop the spiral? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-16 11:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a7c85094-7ea6-49d3-857c-50215cc72ab7n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #577304 |
Quantum mechanics use Planck's black body derivation of the energy element (hγ) that represents the quantization of Maxwell's electromagnetic field but Planck's derivation is based on the black body surface electrons oscillating an ether that motion forms electromagnetic standing waves that are used to quantize Maxwell's electromagnetic field yet the black body radiation effect forms in vacuum that is void of an ether, composed of matter, and an expanding electromagnetic field cannot sustain the particle structure of a propagating photon. Furthermore, the quantum mechanics wave packets are used to represent a wave propagation mechanism of light using wave packets that are formed by the superpositioning (interference) of photon position probability waves but only the first and last wave packets are used the represent the propagation of light yet a series of wave packets are formed between the initial and last wave packets that represents the distance propagated. All of the photons are distributed between the first and last wave packets yet the wave packet mechanism is implying that the photons are concentrated within the first and last wave packets. A photon probability wave represents the possible position of a photon; consequently, the photons are distributed along the entire length between the first and last wave packet; henceforth, a photon probability wave cannot be used to represent the propagation of light because the photon position probability depicts the photons' position uncertainty which protons have a equal probability to exist anywhere in the interval of propagation; consequently, a position uncertainty cannot be used to depict a propagation mechanism of light. Furthermore, a photon probability waves that are used to construct the wave packets can only represent a positive value or zero since the photon probability depicts the possible position of a photon; consequently, a position probability cannot depict a negative value that is required in representing destructive wave interference used to construct the wave packets since the minimum value of a photon position probability is zero. Schrödinger's complex conjugate is used to represent destructive wave interference of the photon probability waves (Schrödinger, p. 1066) but the result of the complex conjugate is the cancellation of positive vectors which is mathematically invalid and nullifies the quantum mechanics wave packet propagation mechanism of light. Davisson–Gerber (1927) electron diffraction experiment is used to justify wave interference using interfering electron matter waves but the destruction of electrons, using electron wave interference, to form the non-electron fringes of the electron diffraction pattern represents the arbitrary destruction of electrons. .................................................................................................................................... The derivation of Schrödinger's photon energy equation is described. de Broglie's electron matter wave is used to represent the structure of the Bohr atom (fig 23) but the circular atomic electron matter wave contained in a circular path, around a nucleus, cannot be represented in a rectangular, cylindrical or spherical coordinate system. Schrodinger takes Bohr's circular electron matter wave and flattens the wave into a straighten electromagnetic wave then places the straighten axis electromagnetic wave into a hypothetical box allowing the electromagnetic wave to resonate, within a box, forming an electromagnetic standing wave which depicts Schrödinger transformation of the Bohr atomic electron matter wave into a particle-in-a-box electromagnetic standing wave (fig 24) depicted with Schrödinger's wave equation using a rectangular coordinate system, -(h2/2m)∇"Ψ( x,y,z) + V(x,y,z) + V(x,y,z)Ψ(x,y,z) = EΨ(x,y,z).....................81 A solution to Schrödinger's wave equation is represented with the wave function, Ψ = Σ c u exp[(2πEt/h + θ)i]............(Schrodinger, p. 1065).........................2 "The wave-function physica l means and determines a continuous distribution of electricity in space, the fluctuations of which determine the radiation by laws of ordinary electrodynamics." (Schrödinger, Abstract). "The fluctuation of the charge will be governed by the Eq. 28, applied to the special case of the hydrogen atom. To find the radiation, that by electrodynamics will originate from these fluctuating charges, we have simply to calculate the rectangular components of the total electric moment by multiplying (28) by x, y, z respectively, then integrating over space, e.g." (Schrodinger, p. 1066). "the frequency v will be given by v= E/h....................(11) , h being Planck's constant. Thus the well known universal relation between energy and frequency is arrived at in a rather simple and unforced" (Schrödinger, p. 1056). Schrödinger's wave function (equ 82) is a solution to Schrodinger's normalized wave equation. The transition of Schrodinger's normalized electromagnetic standing wave, depicted with the wave function, to a lower energy level results in the emission of a photon that energy is represented with Schrodinger's photon energy equation (hv) (Schrödinger, p. 1056) but Schrodinger's photon energy equation (hv) represents the units of the kinetic energy (kg m2 / s2) yet a photon is mass-less, and, an expanding electromagnetic field cannot maintain the particle structure of a propagating electromagnetic photon. ................................................................................................................................... A solution to Schrödinger's wave equation is the wave function (equ 82) represented with, -(h2/2m)∇"Ψ + U(r, θ, φ) ) Ψ(r, θ, φ) = EΨ(r, θ, φ)......... ..........................83 The normalization of he Bohr's atomic matter wave depicted with Schrodinger's wave equation (equ 81) eliminates the atomic nucleus yet Schrodinger's wave function (equ 83) is used to derive the equations of the atomic orbitals which is physically invalid since the atomic orbitals, derived using Schrodinger’s normalized wave equation, does not include the nucleus where the box replaces the nucleus. Also,.................... .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vaN01VLYSQ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-17 10:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b4c0e819-e332-4774-b2cf-9e0aeb50191cn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #577315 |
On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 11:45:05 AM UTC-8, carl eto wrote: > Quantum mechanics use Planck's black body derivation of the energy element (hγ) that represents the quantization of Maxwell's electromagnetic field but Planck's derivation is based on the black body surface electrons oscillating an ether that motion forms electromagnetic standing waves that are used to quantize Maxwell's electromagnetic field yet the black body radiation effect forms in vacuum that is void of an ether, composed of matter, and an expanding electromagnetic field cannot sustain the particle structure of a propagating photon. Furthermore, the quantum mechanics wave packets are used to represent a wave propagation mechanism of light using wave packets that are formed by the superpositioning (interference) of photon position probability waves but only the first and last wave packets are used the represent the propagation of light yet a series of wave packets are formed between the initial and last wave packets that represents the distance propagated. All of the photons are distributed between the first and last wave packets yet the wave packet mechanism is implying that the photons are concentrated within the first and last wave packets. A photon probability wave represents the possible position of a photon; consequently, the photons are distributed along the entire length between the first and last wave packet; henceforth, a photon probability wave cannot be used to represent the propagation of light because the photon position probability depicts the photons' position uncertainty which protons have a equal probability to exist anywhere in the interval of propagation; consequently, a position uncertainty cannot be used to depict a propagation mechanism of light. Furthermore, a photon probability waves that are used to construct the wave packets can only represent a positive value or zero since the photon probability depicts the possible position of a photon; consequently, a position probability cannot depict a negative value that is required in representing destructive wave interference used to construct the wave packets since the minimum value of a photon position probability is zero. Schrödinger's complex conjugate is used to represent destructive wave interference of the photon probability waves (Schrödinger, p. 1066) but the result of the complex conjugate is the cancellation of positive vectors which is mathematically invalid and nullifies the quantum mechanics wave packet propagation mechanism of light. Davisson–Gerber (1927) electron diffraction experiment is used to justify wave interference using interfering electron matter waves but the destruction of electrons, using electron wave interference, to form the non-electron fringes of the electron diffraction pattern represents the arbitrary destruction of electrons. > > > > .................................................................................................................................... > > > > The derivation of Schrödinger's photon energy equation is described. de Broglie's electron matter wave is used to represent the structure of the Bohr atom (fig 23) but the circular atomic electron matter wave contained in a circular path, around a nucleus, cannot be represented in a rectangular, cylindrical or spherical coordinate system. Schrodinger takes Bohr's circular electron matter wave and flattens the wave into a straighten electromagnetic wave then places the straighten axis electromagnetic wave into a hypothetical box allowing the electromagnetic wave to resonate, within a box, forming an electromagnetic standing wave which depicts Schrödinger transformation of the Bohr atomic electron matter wave into a particle-in-a-box electromagnetic standing wave (fig 24) depicted with Schrödinger's wave equation using a rectangular coordinate system, > > > > > > -(h2/2m)∇"Ψ( x,y,z) + V(x,y,z) + V(x,y,z)Ψ(x,y,z) = EΨ(x,y,z).....................81 > > > > A solution to Schrödinger's wave equation is represented with the wave function, > > > > Ψ = Σ c u exp[(2πEt/h + θ)i]............(Schrodinger, p. 1065).........................2 > "The wave-function physica l means and determines a continuous distribution of electricity in space, the fluctuations of which determine the radiation by laws of ordinary electrodynamics." (Schrödinger, Abstract). > "The fluctuation of the charge will be governed by the Eq. 28, applied to the special case of the hydrogen atom. To find the radiation, that by electrodynamics will originate from these fluctuating charges, we have simply to calculate the rectangular components of the total electric moment by multiplying (28) by x, y, z respectively, then integrating over space, e.g." (Schrodinger, p. 1066). > > "the frequency v will be given by v= E/h....................(11) , h being Planck's constant. Thus the well known universal relation between energy and frequency is arrived at in a rather simple and unforced" (Schrödinger, p. 1056). > > > Schrödinger's wave function (equ 82) is a solution to Schrodinger's normalized wave equation. The transition of Schrodinger's normalized electromagnetic standing wave, depicted with the wave function, to a lower energy level results in the emission of a photon that energy is represented with Schrodinger's photon energy equation (hv) (Schrödinger, p. 1056) but Schrodinger's photon energy equation (hv) represents the units of the kinetic energy (kg m2 / s2) yet a photon is mass-less, and, an expanding electromagnetic field cannot maintain the particle structure of a propagating electromagnetic photon. > > > ................................................................................................................................... > > > A solution to Schrödinger's wave equation is the wave function (equ 82) represented with, > -(h2/2m)∇"Ψ + U(r, θ, φ) ) Ψ(r, θ, φ) = EΨ(r, θ, φ)......... ..........................83 > > > > The normalization of he Bohr's atomic matter wave depicted with Schrodinger's wave equation (equ 81) eliminates the atomic nucleus yet Schrodinger's wave function (equ 83) is used to derive the equations of the atomic orbitals which is physically invalid since the atomic orbitals, derived using Schrodinger’s normalized wave equation, does not include the nucleus where the box replaces the nucleus. Also,.................... > > > .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vaN01VLYSQ dfdfdf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web