0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
a discipline of thought that needs 276 degrees of freedom (dimensions)
Even without delving deeply into theory, one notices that our theory of light cannot explain certain fundamental properties of phenomena associated with light. (1) Why does the color of light, and not its intensity, determine whether a certain photochemical reaction occurs?
(2) Why is light of short wavelength generally more effective chemically than light of longer wavelength?
(3)Why is the speed of photoelectrically produced cathode rays independent of the light's intensity?
(4) Why are higher temperatures (and, thus, higher molecular energies) required to add a short-wavelength component to the radiation emitted by an object?
What this means is that since an electron is known to be a fundamental unit of charge isn’t it reasonable that what it emits is electrical energy ? If that is so, there is every chance that the emitted electrical charge gets polarized.
I also think QM is BS.
Protons able to stick together because there is a strong force at work?
Electrons able to not stick with nucleus because QM laws?
There is only one force at work at all time, between charged particles, EM force.
Ether..
The first is that they aren't rigorous. You can draw pictures all day that seem plausible, but the devil is in the details. ...The second is that it has to be in agreement with models that we know are accurate....If you disagree, its up to you to prove it with some rigor, not just pictures and words.
Why do you insist on confusing degrees of freedom with dimensions ?