the condensed version that every one can understandPut me down as a failure.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
The Bohr model of the atom shows electrons as distinct particles moving in circular orbits around the nucleus like a mini solar system, but this model is a dramatic oversimplification which is in many ways misleading.If you are a professional chemist like @chiralSPO, you can't use the Bohr model.
(f(x)=x)+(f(x)≠x)Let's try to analyse this little fragment of mathematics, shall we?
f(x)=xIs this the declaration of f(x)? ie f(x) = x for all values of x? If so, why mention f(x) at all? Just say x.
f(x)≠xThis is clearly not the declaration of f(x)! We are told explicitly that f(x)≠x!
(f(x)=x)+(f(x)≠x)This is clearly not about declaration of f(x)!
I think Planck was wrong about frequency and energy as a direct relationshipI think you are talking about the Planck-Einstein equation:
the photo-electric effectThe equivalent equation for the photoelectric effect can be written as:
Anyone who knows the energy levels of the atom knows the frequency of photon release increases with each photoelectric effect the higher-out the energy shell...and not as the Planck equation suggests; the further out the energy shell (higher as we call it) the lower the energy release though, and thus the lower the energy release for the higher the frequency for the photo-electric effectI think that mentioning the photoelectric effect is just confusing this statement?