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

Groups > sci.physics > #712338 > unrolled thread

The N orbital

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-10 14:48 -0800
    Re: The N orbital Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-11-10 15:58 -0800
      Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-11 02:34 -0800
        Re: The N orbital moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-11 17:39 +0000
          Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-11 09:51 -0800
            Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-11 20:51 +0000
              Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-12 04:27 -0800
                Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-12 12:52 +0000
                  Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-12 05:21 -0800
                    Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-12 17:25 +0000
              Re: The N orbital moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-12 18:03 +0000
                Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-12 22:40 -0800
                  Re: The N orbital moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-13 07:02 +0000
                  Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 12:35 +0000
                    Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 04:39 -0800
                      Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 05:09 -0800
                        Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 05:40 -0800
                        Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 05:47 -0800
                        Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 13:48 +0000
                          Re: The N orbital moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-13 14:59 +0000
                            Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 07:02 -0800
                              Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 16:36 +0000
                              Re: The N orbital moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-13 18:20 +0000
                                Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 13:56 -0800
                                  Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 01:31 +0000
                                    Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 20:26 -0800
                                      Re: The N orbital moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-14 06:55 +0000
                                        Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 03:56 -0800
                                          Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 13:30 +0000
                                          Re: The N orbital moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-14 16:21 +0000
                                      Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 13:30 +0000
                                    Re: The N orbital benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 11:58 -0500
                                      Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 12:45 -0800
                                        Re: The N orbital benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 16:51 -0500
                                          Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 14:50 -0800
                                          Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 00:00 +0000
                                            Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 17:02 -0800
                                  Re: The N orbital moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-14 06:12 +0000
                                  Re: The N orbital "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 17:21 -0800
                        Re: The N orbital moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-13 15:14 +0000
                      Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 13:48 +0000
                        Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 06:35 -0800
                          Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 16:29 +0000
                            Re: The N orbital john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 09:20 -0800
                              Re: The N orbital Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 01:31 +0000

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#712651

MM
Maybe you can explain how Atom-in-a-box might indicate that gas clouds would be unaffected by the gravity at the Milky Ways center.

Also- do electrons make the electric field?

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

#712659

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> MM
> Maybe you can explain how Atom-in-a-box might indicate that gas clouds
> would be unaffected by the gravity at the Milky Ways center.

What happens inside of atoms with the interaction of the electromagnetic
field has fuck-all to do with what happens in the center of galaxies with
the interaction of the gravitational field. 

You might as well be asking how beta decay explains the harmonics in an
organ pipe. One doesn’t have much to do with the other. 

> 
> Also- do electrons make the electric field?
> 



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

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

#712670

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>MM
>Maybe you can explain how Atom-in-a-box might indicate that gas clouds 
>would be unaffected by the gravity at the Milky Ways center.

What does Atom-in-a-box have to do with gravity or galactic gas clouds?
Unless Odd's Atom-in-a-box isn't the one I am familiar with, it's a way
to show the atomic orbitals only. No gravity, no galaxies!

>Also- do electrons make the electric field?

The presence or absence of charges (not only electrons) modifies the
electric field nearby. The electric field is always there, there is no way
to turn it on or off, only cancel its effects by an opposing electric
field.  It is not "made" by anything, that implies a dynamic process.

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

#712685

MM
“It is not "made" by anything, that implies a dynamic process. ”
Every electron is a dynamo

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

#712710

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> MM
> “It is not "made" by anything, that implies a dynamic process. ”
> Every electron is a dynamo
> 

No, it’s really not. These things don’t conform to your imagination. 

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

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

#712717

Odd
“> Every electron is a dynamo 
> 

No, it’s really not. These things don’t conform to your imagination. ”

What does imagination have to do with it?
All electrons constantly emit a flow of radiation that makes the electric field.
That’s why it’s called electric.

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

#712724

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>Odd
>>" Every electron is a dynamo

>No, it's really not. These things don't conform to your imagination. "

>What does imagination have to do with it?

It is your (Little Pharma-addled) imagination that comes up with such crap
as "every electron is a dynamo". That's what.

>All electrons constantly emit a flow of radiation that makes the electric field.
>That's why it's called electric.

It's obvious that you have no CLUE how anything 'electric' operates.
The electron's effect on the electric field is fixed, static, there is
nothing to emit.

Often lines of force are used to _represent_ electric fields, but that is
what scientists call a model. They aren't real.

I bet you don't know the differences between any pair of these words/
phrases - electric field, electric potential, current, charge, voltage,
dielectric, resistance, ....

Other than (possibly) knowing that all of these are somehow "electric", a
word that probably also belongs on that list.  Yet here you are, spewing
forth your latest hallucination ("every electron is a dynamo") as if it
was a fact.  I'm sure that once in a while you get bad shit and things
like a yellow sky with a violet sun, glowing pocket-sized elephants and
giant carniverous butterflies with bloody fangs become factual to you as
well.

You need to hook up with Archie Plutonium. He's another crank that
believes in a sort of "fractal" universe (only two levels however), the
whole universe being some cosmic plutonium atom. He also believes the
proton (not electron, however) is some sort of dynamo, full of dancing
muons or something. Between the two of you you should be able to come up
with something completely incomprehensible.

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

#712729

MM
“The electron's effect on the electric field is fixed, static, there is 
nothing to emit. ”
Just by ‘being there’, hey?
Wow! That’s exactly how you say gravity works!

Change Standard Model to “Being There”

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

#712731

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> MM
> “The electron's effect on the electric field is fixed, static, there is 
> nothing to emit. ”
> Just by ‘being there’, hey?
> Wow! That’s exactly how you say gravity works!
> 
> Change Standard Model to “Being There”
> 

I’m amused by your “everlasting factory” notion of the universe. Things
perpetually making other things. Atoms being made and spit out by ... hmmm,
by what? Air being created by .... hmmmmm.

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

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

#712745

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>MM
>"The electron's effect on the electric field is fixed, static, there is
>nothing to emit. "
>Just by "being there", hey?

That's right!

>Wow! That's exactly how you say gravity works!

Very good! I see you somehow managed to beg, borrow or steal a clue from
somewhere.

There are many similarities between gravitation and electromagnetism.
They both follow the inverse square law and both have infinite range.
They both can be easily observed on human scales.  But remember, they
are not the same, there are also many differences.

>Change Standard Model to "Being There"

Think of, say, a compressed spring or something. It may have a lot of
potential energy in it, but that energy and internal forces exist just
by "being there". There's nothing dynamic to continuously generate the
energy or force, it is just there until released.  Same with 
electromagnetism, the charge of an electron is a property of electrons.

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

#712730

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> Odd
>> Every electron is a dynamo 
>> 
> 
> No, it’s really not. These things don’t conform to your imagination. ”
> 
> What does imagination have to do with it?
> All electrons constantly emit a flow of radiation that makes the electric field.
> That’s why it’s called electric.
> 

No, John. Where did you get this silly idea? Aliens tell you that?

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

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

#712748

On 11/13/2018 8:31 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
>> MM
>> “It is not "made" by anything, that implies a dynamic process. ”
>> Every electron is a dynamo
>>
> 
> No, it’s really not. These things don’t conform to your imagination.
> 
Actually John is correct, Odd. You just too ignorant of science to 
understand it.

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

#712772

benj
“> No, it’s really not. These things don’t conform to your imagination. 
> 
Actually John is correct, Odd. You just too ignorant of science to 
understand it. ”

ALL electrons are dynamos that are constantly being refuelled by their protons. All protons absorb electron pressure, causing gravity/inertia.

Pretty simple. Shouldn’t take Odd and MM more than another decade

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

#712778

On 11/14/2018 3:45 PM, john wrote:
> benj
> “> No, it’s really not. These things don’t conform to your imagination.
>>
> Actually John is correct, Odd. You just too ignorant of science to
> understand it. ”
> 
> ALL electrons are dynamos that are constantly being refuelled by their protons. All protons absorb electron pressure, causing gravity/inertia.
> 
> Pretty simple. Shouldn’t take Odd and MM more than another decade
> 
Simple but backwards, John. All electrons are dynamos that fuel their 
protons to keep them stable. All protons in stable matter absorb 
electron pressure to keep[ them from decaying. I'm sure Odd agrees with 
me as usual...

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

#712788

benj
“Simple but backwards, John. All electrons are dynamos that fuel their 
protons to keep them stable. All protons in stable matter absorb 
electron pressure to keep[ them from decaying. I'm sure Odd agrees with 
me as usual... ”
They fuel each other.

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

#712799

benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/14/2018 3:45 PM, john wrote:
>> benj
>>> No, it’s really not. These things don’t conform to your imagination.
>>> 
>> Actually John is correct, Odd. You just too ignorant of science to
>> understand it. ”
>> 
>> ALL electrons are dynamos that are constantly being refuelled by their
>> protons. All protons absorb electron pressure, causing gravity/inertia.
>> 
>> Pretty simple. Shouldn’t take Odd and MM more than another decade
>> 
> Simple but backwards, John. All electrons are dynamos that fuel their 
> protons to keep them stable. All protons in stable matter absorb 
> electron pressure to keep[ them from decaying. I'm sure Odd agrees with 
> me as usual...
> 

Keep feeding him manure. Tells him you’re maintaining a worm farm. 

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

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

#712803

Odd
“Keep feeding him manure. Tells him you’re maintaining a worm farm”
In the dark Odd, they call you

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

#712722

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>MM
>"It is not "made" by anything, that implies a dynamic process. "
>Every electron is a dynamo

No, they are not.

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

#712804

On Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 1:56:11 PM UTC-8, john wrote:
> MM
> “It is not "made" by anything, that implies a dynamic process. ”
> Every electron is a dynamo
Sounds like reality to me.Mangetic field plus a coil can light a bulb without motion.Saw it done on you tube.Its like free energy.Bert

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

#712652

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>The 1:2 orbit is a standing wave of synchronized rotations in two 
>orthogonal planes. As we know from gyroscopes, a spinning object resists 
>being being moved out of the plane of the spin.

And that is exactly why your retarded precessing spinny things are such a
failure. Conservation of angular momentum means that spinning things
actually resist precession without an external torque, much less actually
get all retarded and precess on their own like your OCD keeps screaming
at you.

Try the following experiment. Mount a bicycle securely so that its front
wheel is off the ground and handlebars can be rotated. Get the front wheel
spinning really, really good. Now (try to) turn the handlebars rapidly and
tell us what happens.

Or do this: Get an old computer hard drive. The larger rotating mass the
better, get an ancient 5 1/2" drive if you can.  Connect it to a computer
power supply but without mounting it in a chassis. Hold it in your hands.
While it is spinning, try to turn/rotate it.  Just try to turn it as if
you want to precess it at right angle to the angle of rotation. It's
almost as if it fights back, or if someone is trying to wrest the drive
out of your hands.

> So an orbit like this 
>will resist being moved out of either plane, and all forces on it will 
>act to move it only along the intersection of the two planes.
>So individual atoms will only be affected by gravity along this intersection.

How the hell did you come up with something as stupid as that last 
sentence from the rest of what you wrote?

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web