[McQueen (OP)]

The present day ontology defining the electron is sadly outdated, illogical and does not fit in with what is known. For instance, take the idea that electron emission and absorption is a one-off event. The electron cloud around the nucleus, absorbs an incoming photon. (How does one wave absorb another wave) The added energy results in the whole cloud moving to a higher energy state. (What happens in multiple electron atoms, how does this work?)  Then after some indeterminate time, the electron cloud drops back down to its original level and the difference in energy is emitted as a photon. (How does an electron cloud emit an energetic photon without recoil, surely a breach of the conservation of energy laws?). Compare the above with what actually happens as seen in the working of atomic clocks.  The electron oscillates in the Gigahertz range (9,192,631,770 Hz), but even though this is the case no microwaves of that frequency are emitted. Only optical frequency and above photons can be directly emitted by electrons. This is because the energy levels of the microwaves is so low that the photons cannot be directly emitted, instead the whole atom shifts to a metastable state.

To return to the topic at hand the working of atomic clocks indicate that ALL electrons oscillate at fantastic frequencies of hundreds of trillions of oscillation per second. A look at any modern smart phone supports this theory as smart phone process  data at the rate of several Gigahertz per second. This being so the electron with its infinitesimal size and the miniscule distances it has to travel must in fact oscillate at rates of hundreds of trillions of hertz per second AND absorb and emit photons at that rate. For the electron not to do so would be an anomaly. It is a sad shortcoming of QM that it claims that the frequency of a photon is an abstract concept that is useful in calculating the energy of a photon. Instead, this new theory claims that electrons emit photons at the rate of hundreds of trillions of photons per second. These photons forms rays or lines of connected photons with each photon in the ray possessing identical energies. To read more about this idea, read my paper on: Redefining Electrons. 
https://tinyurl.com/4pfnjv43

[alancalverd]

How does one wave absorb another wave

In this case, it doesn't.

How does an electron cloud emit an energetic photon without recoil,

It doesn't

 

it claims that the frequency of a photon is an abstract concept

It doesn't

And so forth.... There is a world of difference between asking  sensible questions (science) and shouting nonsense (politics, philosophy and religion). 

[McQueen (OP)]

Thank you for your one word answers, although they do little to address the questions I had raised.  I will try to do a little better.
With regard to your first laconic answer to my question of how does one wave absorb another wave? Your answer:  ″It doesn′t.″

Here is the QM explanation: The interaction between the electron wavefunction and the electromagnetic wave (photon) is described by the interaction Hamiltonian. This term in the Hamiltonian represents the energy of interaction between the electron and the electromagnetic field.
While this mathematical explanation on how it is possible for one wave to absorb another wave might hold good, it doesn′t explain the actual behaviour of photons as being emitted at the rate of hundreds of trillions per second. Believe it or not this is how fast things have been found to work in the present day. Nor does the explanation deal with the question of recoil or the conservation of energy and momentum in the classical sense.

On to the second question: How does an electron cloud emit a photon without recoil? to which your answer was: It doesn′t.

Here is the QM explanation:
 In classical mechanics, the emission of a photon by an atom would cause the atom to recoil due to conservation of momentum. However, in quantum mechanics, the situation is different. The electron cloud's change in energy levels doesn't involve a point-like particle emitting a photon from a single location. Instead, it involves the entire probability distribution of the electron's position changing state.
So OK, no recoil is present which in turn means that the laws of energy conservation turn a blind eye to what is a macro event, all well and good.

Finally, to my assertion that according to quantum mechanics the frequency of a photon was an abstract  function: You stated that. It isn′t.

Here is what Quantum mechanics has to say:
Photons exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties. The frequency of a photon is associated with its wave nature, while the energy quantization relates to its particle aspect. In the context of electromagnetic waves, the frequency f corresponds to the oscillation rate of the electric and magnetic fields.

Therefore, it appears that there are explanations for everything. All that I was trying to state was that the explanations are not entirely satisfactory and do not fit in with the observations. 

Your totally uncalled for comment that: And so forth.... There is a world of difference between asking  sensible questions (science) and shouting nonsense (politics, philosophy and religion).

If you are not able to discern that my questions are both sensible and warranted, there is little I can do about it.  That's just your mind set and you are entitled to it.

[paul cotter]

Current theory offers the best possible fit with all observations. Before one criticises a theory it is necessary to understand it, OP does not.

[evan_au]

The electron oscillates in the Gigahertz range (9,192,631,770 Hz), but even though this is the case no microwaves of that frequency are emitted.

When the atom is irradiated with electromagnetic radiation having an energy corresponding to the energetic difference between the two sub-levels the radiation is absorbed and the atom is excited, going from the F = 3 sub-level to the F = 4 one. After a small fraction of a second the atom will re-emit the radiation and return to its F = 3 ground state. From the definition of the second it follows that the radiation in question has a frequency of exactly 9.19263177 GHz, corresponding to a wavelength of about 3.26 cm and therefore belonging to the microwave range.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium_standard#Technical_details

[evan_au]

this new theory claims that electrons emit photons at the rate of hundreds of trillions of photons per second

Photons carry energy. If an electron (or the atom in which it is contained) emits lots of photons, it will lose energy, a process which obviously must stop when there is no more energy to radiate.

It turns out that there is an atomic "ground state" for a particular atom which is stable, and from which the atom will radiate no more photons.

However, if an atom absorbs energy from a photon (or from other mechanisms like bumping into another atom), then the atom is no longer in the ground state. An electron can lose this extra energy by emitting one or more photons; the spectrum of this radiation is determined by the electron structure of the atom or molecule.

So an atom could emit lots of photons per second, but only if it is also absorbing a similar amount of energy, absorbing photons, mechanical motion, chemical reactions, etc.

[Bored chemist]

Only optical frequency and above photons can be directly emitted by electrons. This is because the energy levels of the microwaves is so low that the photons cannot be directly emitted, instead the whole atom shifts to a metastable state.

Nonsense.
There's a stack of spectroscopy done with photons of lower energy than those of visible light

You are posting rubbish.

[alancalverd]

the electron wavefunction

A wavefunction is not a wave.

I think you need to find a better quantum mechanics textbook.

[Kryptid]

In classical mechanics, the emission of a photon by an atom would cause the atom to recoil due to conservation of momentum. However, in quantum mechanics, the situation is different. The electron cloud's change in energy levels doesn't involve a point-like particle emitting a photon from a single location. Instead, it involves the entire probability distribution of the electron's position changing state.

Where are you quoting from?

[McQueen (OP)]

When the atom is irradiated with electromagnetic radiation having an energy corresponding to the energetic difference between the two sub-levels the radiation is absorbed and the atom is excited, going from the F = 3 sub-level to the F = 4 one. After a small fraction of a second the atom will re-emit the radiation and return to its F = 3 ground state. From the definition of the second it follows that the radiation in question has a frequency of exactly 9.19263177 GHz, corresponding to a wavelength of about 3.26 cm and therefore belonging to the microwave range.

Evan_ au, I would like to thank you for the first piece of constructive criticism that has been made on this thread. Having said that I also have to state that the reference you quoted, even if it is from Wikipedia might be in error.  In actual fact here is an explanation of how atomic clocks works. The process does not amplify the original microwave signal. The Caesium atoms are exposed to microwave radiation at a frequency close to the natural frequency of the caesium atomic transition. This frequency is about 9,192,631,770 Hz (9.192 GHz). Instead, the microwave frequency is tuned and maintained to match the natural transition frequency of the caesium atoms. The number of atoms in a specific energy state is counted. This count is used to determine if the microwave frequency is correctly tuned to the atomic transition frequency. Therefore, Caesium atoms absorb the microwave radiation and move to a higher energy state, they do not re-emit the same frequency signal when they drop to a lower energy level.  This information is available here: https://timeandnavigation.si.edu/multimedia-asset/how-does-the-nist-7-atomic-clock-work
However, the newer atomic clocks use OPTICAL signals which can resonate with the incoming signal and be directly measured.

Where are you quoting from?

Introduction to Quantum Mechanics by David J. Griffiths
Griffiths explains the quantization of energy levels and how transitions between these levels result in the emission or absorption of photons. The book discusses the wavefunction of electrons and how changes in these wavefunctions involve the entire probability distribution.

A wavefunction is not a wave.

I think you need to find a better quantum mechanics textbook.

If you think a wave function is not a wave perhaps you can tell me what this is?
Feynman discusses the concept of electrons not as discrete particles but as entities that can be described by probability amplitudes, which form a sort of ″cloud around the nucleus. He introduces the idea that particles can take multiple paths simultaneously, contributing to the overall probability cloud. Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals by Richard P. Feynman and Albert R. Hibbs:
If you are still fumbling around for an answer, the key words here are :Particle can take multiple paths
simultaneously.
Can you imagine trying to apply any classical laws of physics to such a concept, it is not science it is science fiction!

Current theory offers the best possible fit with all observations. Before one criticises a theory it is necessary to understand it, OP does not.

As to this . the less said the better!

[McQueen (OP)]

So an atom could emit lots of photons per second, but only if it is also absorbing a similar amount of energy, absorbing photons, mechanical motion, chemical reactions, etc.

Absolutely! The electron would not emit photons unless it had extra energy to do so gained by first absorbing photons. (my theory)

[McQueen (OP)]

Nonsense.
There's a stack of spectroscopy done with photons of lower energy than those of visible light

You are posting rubbish.

And you are avoiding the truth by waffling around. The fact is yes, some infra-red does get directly emitted by electrons but that is it, not microwaves certainly.

[paul cotter]

Indeed, the less said the better, on your behalf. The wavefunction is a quantum DESCRIPTION of an electron for certain purposes. A wavefunction is a mathematical construct while an electron a real world material particle- not the same thing at all. Also classical rules do not apply in the quantum domain and trying to apply classical in such situations leads to the "science fiction" you have alluded to.

[McQueen (OP)]

Indeed, the less said the better, on your behalf. The wavefunction is a quantum DESCRIPTION of an electron for certain purposes. A wavefunction is a mathematical construct while an electron a real world material particle- not the same thing at all.

Well, if everyday language was allowed, I would have quote a rude retort for you, since it isn't. You are talking out of your nether parts instead of trying to understand what is being said.

[paul cotter]

That's fine by me, water off a duck's back. I don't claim to be an expert on these matters, by any means, there are those on this forum way, way more educated in physics than me. Your last post indicates that my "nether parts" have a superior understanding of the subject matter than you do- is this possible?

[alancalverd]

If you think a wave function is not a wave perhaps you can tell me what this is?

It is very clear. You have simply failed to understand it. Good scientific writing is very precise - you have to read what it says, not what you think it ought to say. Similarly with your reading of Griffiths.

Can you imagine trying to apply any classical laws of physics to such a concept

The test of quantum mechanics is whether, if scaled up to mesoscopic objects, it predicts classical (i.e. observed) behavior. Which it does. Like relativity, you can't derive the underlying model from the classical approximation, but you can derive the classical model from the quantum or relativistic one.

[Kryptid]

We know that atoms experience recoil when they absorb or emit photons because Doppler laser cooling relies on that in order to work:

[Bored chemist]

Nonsense.
There's a stack of spectroscopy done with photons of lower energy than those of visible light

You are posting rubbish.

And you are avoiding the truth by waffling around. The fact is yes, some infra-red does get directly emitted by electrons but that is it, not microwaves certainly.

Bollocks.

Beacuse this exists.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_paramagnetic_resonance

[McQueen (OP)]

That's fine by me, water off a duck's back. I don't claim to be an expert on these matters, by any means, there are those on this forum way, way more educated in physics than me. Your last post indicates that my "nether parts" have a superior understanding of the subject matter than you do- is this possible?

I don't think so. Your nether parts seem to have a greater understanding.

[alancalverd]

The electron would not emit photons unless it had extra energy to do so gained by first absorbing photons.

And where, pray, did those photons come from?