Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #704338 > unrolled thread

S orbital most energetic

Started byjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
First post2018-09-24 07:13 -0700
Last post2018-09-24 17:37 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 27 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 07:13 -0700
    Re: S orbital most energetic moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 15:53 +0000
      Re: S orbital most energetic Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 16:04 +0000
        Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 11:31 -0700
    Re: S orbital most energetic mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-24 12:02 -0700
      Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:24 -0700
    Re: S orbital most energetic Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-09-24 13:40 -0700
      Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:05 -0700
        Re: S orbital most energetic Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-09-24 15:37 -0700
          Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 06:49 -0700
            Re: S orbital most energetic mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-25 18:00 -0700
              Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 07:12 -0700
                Re: S orbital most energetic moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 14:58 +0000
                  Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 09:27 -0700
                    Re: S orbital most energetic moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 17:45 +0000
                      Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 13:30 -0700
                        Re: S orbital most energetic moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 22:02 +0000
                          Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 16:29 -0700
                            Re: S orbital most energetic mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-26 18:04 -0700
                        Re: S orbital most energetic Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 01:10 +0000
                          Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 07:08 -0700
                            Re: S orbital most energetic moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-27 18:02 +0000
                              Re: S orbital most energetic john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 15:30 -0700
                            Re: S orbital most energetic Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:37 +0000
                Re: S orbital most energetic mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-26 14:30 -0700
        Re: S orbital most energetic moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 22:37 +0000
          Re: S orbital most energetic mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-24 17:37 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#704338 — S orbital most energetic

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-24 07:13 -0700
SubjectS orbital most energetic
Message-ID<d81f3221-d373-4b38-870d-912a8736e1c0@googlegroups.com>
In order for one electron or two electrons to offer enough presence to become a sphere- as they do in Hydrogen and Helium- they must work the hardest.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#704355

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2018-09-24 15:53 +0000
Message-ID<pob19a$1sf$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#704338
Another successful trip to "Little Pharma", I see.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704361

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-24 16:04 +0000
Message-ID<pob1va$epg$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#704355
Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
> Another successful trip to "Little Pharma", I see.
> 

It’s just John putting on the white lab coat and pretending to talk like a
physicist. It’s a costume he just can’t help but put on every few days, and
it gives him the same kind of comfort a cross-dresser gets from silky
underwear and heels. 

-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704386

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-24 11:31 -0700
Message-ID<c6fe6560-dc50-419e-beb7-2c5efe09a6fe@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704361
So subsequent atomic orbitals need less and less energy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704394

Frommitchrae3323@gmail.com
Date2018-09-24 12:02 -0700
Message-ID<e82e4dd0-f368-445f-b5c7-190be4e372f0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704338
On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 7:13:42 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
> In order for one electron or two electrons to offer enough presence to become a sphere- as they do in Hydrogen and Helium- they must work the hardest.

Electrons are their own spheres as all particles and atoms are...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704397

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-24 12:24 -0700
Message-ID<d7a5b54f-e67b-4df4-b7fe-99e7322ae627@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704394
Mitch
“Electrons are their own spheres as all particles and atoms are... ”
So an atom is a sphere containing many other spheres?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704415

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2018-09-24 13:40 -0700
Message-ID<73a3a078-dcfd-4d37-b2a7-d7d21fa9f58a@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704338
On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 7:13:42 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
> In order for one electron or two electrons to offer enough presence to become a sphere- as they do in Hydrogen and Helium- they must work the hardest.


They don't do work at all, otherwise the atoms would run out of energy and decay.

Double-A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704422

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-24 15:05 -0700
Message-ID<2cb10928-430b-4730-85d4-410579bd7b16@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704415
AA
“They don't do work at all, otherwise the atoms would run out of energy and decay. ”
That’s why bodybuilders shrink up and disappear, too

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704431

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2018-09-24 15:37 -0700
Message-ID<619ca9c5-f3dc-4059-b556-837ff84e740e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704422
On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 3:05:16 PM UTC-7, john wrote:
> AA
> “They don't do work at all, otherwise the atoms would run out of energy and decay. ”
> That’s why bodybuilders shrink up and disappear, too


Bodybuilders consume lots of protein!  What are atoms consuming?

Double-A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704499

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-25 06:49 -0700
Message-ID<5546a974-b396-46fd-8835-0ad272634ac4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704431
AA
“Bodybuilders consume lots of protein!  What are atoms consuming? 
”
Gravity

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704610

Frommitchrae3323@gmail.com
Date2018-09-25 18:00 -0700
Message-ID<e9bdae14-d279-4e3e-8699-8b706a892981@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704499
On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 6:49:45 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
> AA
> “Bodybuilders consume lots of protein!  What are atoms consuming? 
> ”
> Gravity

Your atoms are in the toilet Roy Masters...
Ha Ha… ha

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704668

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-26 07:12 -0700
Message-ID<f8df4306-c6f8-487a-bb63-f833e55b4ef7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704610
Anyway- the Hydrogen and Helium atomic discs are the fastest rotaters

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704673

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2018-09-26 14:58 +0000
Message-ID<pog6po$lup$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#704668
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>"Bodybuilders consume lots of protein!  What are atoms consuming?
>"
>Gravity

and

>Anyway- the Hydrogen and Helium atomic discs are the fastest rotaters

I keep telling you, do not buy the brown acid!! Look at what it causes you
to write!!!

H and He do not have any "disks", they are spherically symmetric.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704700

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-26 09:27 -0700
Message-ID<e935d972-f621-4580-8917-22cc088134c3@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704673
MM
“H and He do not have any "disks", they are spherically symmetric. ”
Is the Milky Way a sphere?
It has a spherical halo.
It has a spherical body of gas that all rotates with the disc. (A bit slower.) That gas stretches 1/3 of the way PAST the halo.

Is it a sphere, Michael?
Or a disc?
Or both- a disc constantly renewing a sphere?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704713

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2018-09-26 17:45 +0000
Message-ID<poggkf$k44$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#704700
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>MM
>"H and He do not have any "disks", they are spherically symmetric.
>"
>Is the Milky Way a sphere?

Non sequitur.

>It has a spherical halo.

Non sequitur.

>It has a spherical body of gas that all rotates with the disc. (A bit 
>slower.) That gas stretches 1/3 of the way PAST the halo.

Non sequitur. It has a disk.


>Is it a sphere, Michael?
>Or a disc?
>Or both- a disc constantly renewing a sphere?

Non sequitur. It has a disk.
Nobody ever claimed the Milky Way is spherically symmetric. (except you???)
It has a disk, therefore is not spherically symmetric.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704748

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-26 13:30 -0700
Message-ID<34835897-a901-4756-89b5-755d3cdf4453@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704713
MM
“not spherically symmetric. ”

If something is on a sphere, and no matter which way you slice the sphere in half you always get half of that thing, it is spherically symmetric. A disc is spherically symmetric.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704782

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2018-09-26 22:02 +0000
Message-ID<pogvkv$a5q$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#704748
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:


>If something is on a sphere, and no matter which way you slice the sphere
>in half you always get half of that thing, it is spherically symmetric. A 
>disc is spherically symmetric.

That is NOT the definition of spherically symmetric! Spherically symmetric
means you cannot tell the difference between the view from any direction,
or in other words, it can be rotated by any amount (in all 3 dimensions,
not just the XY plane) and you cannot tell if it has been rotated.

Since you need pictures, think of a completely featureless, perfectly
spherical ball. Rotate the ball in any direction and you cannot tell
if you have or not.

A disk does NOT qualify, since there is an edge-on view which is
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from its face-on view.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704792

Fromjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-26 16:29 -0700
Message-ID<a402b01a-33f8-4980-a232-4c0ff6cc0f4b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704782
MM
“disk does NOT qualify, since there is an edge-on view which is 
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from its face-on view. 
”
Point particles qualify!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704799

Frommitchrae3323@gmail.com
Date2018-09-26 18:04 -0700
Message-ID<b5eb121e-a8ed-4192-90cd-ffa3267de586@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#704792
On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 4:30:02 PM UTC-7, john wrote:
> MM
> “disk does NOT qualify, since there is an edge-on view which is 
> COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from its face-on view. 
> ”
> Point particles qualify!

Particles are mathematical energy points
floating bonded in the atom's shells.

The first three particles belong bonded in the atom.

Neutrinos leave the atom permanently.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#704800

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2018-09-27 01:10 +0000
Message-ID<pohamj$16la$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#704748
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> MM
> “not spherically symmetric. ”
> 
> If something is on a sphere, and no matter which way you slice the sphere
> in half you always get half of that thing, it is spherically symmetric. A
> disc is spherically symmetric.
> 

I love it when you demonstrate you don’t even know what the words you use
even mean. 

For Pete’s sake. 

-- 
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web