Post by: ron123456 on 05/03/2022 20:04:22
It would be interesting....thx
Post by: Origin on 05/03/2022 20:32:28
HelloCould you expound on this a bit? What is wrong with the equations we currently have?
It would be interesting....thx
Post by: ron123456 on 08/03/2022 18:57:01
Post by: Bored chemist on 08/03/2022 19:12:27
I don't know about existing equations.....I just think that photon tunnels, if they don't already exist, could easily made to exist and could be the source of propulsion that is required to travel quickly...They would concentrate the photons and even expand on more tunnels that would repel a superconductive 3D grid of depth of crystal nature.......wow.....fast......thx again for your responseSo, you believe in magic.
Post by: ron123456 on 09/03/2022 20:17:34
Post by: Bored chemist on 09/03/2022 20:49:39
....not as much magic as a quantum jump with an electron sharing two different levels with different probability is going to generate a EM field of sine wave nature in a vacuum....That is magic!It's what works.
Post by: ron123456 on 10/03/2022 14:25:36
Post by: Bored chemist on 10/03/2022 17:56:48
I just can't comprehend
Post by: ron123456 on 12/03/2022 19:49:09
Post by: Bored chemist on 12/03/2022 20:04:50
I just quickly want to state that the exact shape of a photon can be obtained by classical antenna theoryWhy would you want to say that?
Post by: ron123456 on 13/03/2022 18:30:39
My problem is that shape / size ( is very important ) ....How does the energy in a magnetic field line interact with a photon's energy shape......In addition how is the magnetic energy in a field line transferred along the field line to interact with an energetic photon?....shape of the photon has to come into the formula some way?....thx again
Post by: Bored chemist on 13/03/2022 19:30:20
Post by: ron123456 on 13/03/2022 20:24:35
Well this is finally revealed.....Where are we?
Post by: ron123456 on 13/03/2022 20:46:43
thx again
Post by: Bored chemist on 14/03/2022 09:56:32
https://physicsworld.com/a/how-to-shape-photons-using-a-trapped-atom/Those "shapes" are not shapes.
thx again
"...absorb a photon with one temporal shape and then emit a photon with a different temporal shape..."
Plenty of newspapers seek to "shape public opinion", but public opinion has no shape.
Post by: Origin on 14/03/2022 13:15:48
I would recommend that you pick a specific topic to discuss instead jumping all over the place.
Post by: ron123456 on 15/03/2022 20:01:41
Post by: Origin on 15/03/2022 21:39:59
There should never have been an instantaneous quantum jump when classical antenna theory would have done just fine, perhaps or more so, even betterThe transition from one quantum state to another is not instantaneous. Quantum theory successfully explains the behavior of electrons in an atom. Classical theory is incomplete and does not adequately explain the behavior of electrons in an atom.
Post by: ron123456 on 17/03/2022 17:06:00
Post by: Origin on 17/03/2022 20:38:30
That's the problem....quantum theory is always EXPLAINING after the fact and to promote the statement " quantum mechanics is used because it works"I don't know what you mean by this. Quantum mechanics was developed because the classical physics did not work. Electrons should spiral into the nucleus for instance and the photoelectric effect could not be understood.
.Again, the wave machine that is used typically to explain transverse wave propagation (steel rods connected by a thin string) is good for a MEDIUM but not for a VACUUM.A wave machine is simply a device to help demonstrate how waves interact, it is not meant to exactly explain how EM radiations propagates. A wave machine is irrelevant as to whether quantum mechanics is accurate or not.
An electron falling from one level to a lower level in one direction IN A VACUUM will have to oscillate and not simply fall in one direction.It doesn't really make a lot of sense to talk about a vacuum inside an atom. The electron is in a higher energy state when it is in a higher level, when it drops to the lower level it is now at a lower energy state and the energy change is reflected in the photon that is emitted by the electron.
This can happen if the electron falls to the lower level by circling the nucleus many times (2D) thus forming a changing dipole....The electron does not circle the nucleus like the moon orbiting the earth.
2D can easily be expanded to 3D and probability orbitals used instead of shellsNot sure what you mean here.
Post by: Bored chemist on 17/03/2022 20:42:26
That's the problem....quantum theory is always EXPLAINING after the factNo.
It made predictions and they were tested and found to be true.
For example
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern%E2%80%93Gerlach_experiment
Just because you don't know the history of science doesn't mean that you can make it up.
Post by: ron123456 on 17/03/2022 21:55:21
Wave_Machine.png (95.59 kB . 401x161 - viewed 2267 times) This picture only works in a medium for transverse waves....It won't work in a vacuum for an EM transverse wave......How are you going to oscillate the electron dipole polarity upon spontaneous emission of a photon from an atom in outer space / vacuum? The electron, upon falling to a lower energy level has to circle the nucleus of the atom (2D for now) many times to oscilate the polarity of the formed dipole ......forget 3D just for now.....Once it is encircling the nucleus upon falling from a higher to a lower energy level ,then flip the 2D picture 90 degrees so the picture is coming out of the screen/page to see the oscillating dipole antenna's polarity change.....and the shape of the formed EM photon pulse emitted should have an initial large circumference leading edge of say E1(higher energy level) all the way to a decreasing circumference (E2 lower energy level) for it's trailing edge The frequency would be the # of times around the atom before reaching the lower level....
Post by: Origin on 17/03/2022 22:44:16
(95.59 kB . 401x161 - viewed 26 times) This picture only works in a medium for transverse waves....It won't work in a vacuum......So what, that's irrelevant.
.How are you going to oscillate the electron dipole upon spontaneous emission of a photon from an atom in outer space / vacuum?You don't need to oscillate the dipole.
The electron, upon falling to a lower energy level has to circle the nucleus of the atom (2D for now) many times to oscilate the polarity of the formed dipoleSo according to this the electron can have less energy but at that lower energy level it still has not emitted a photon so it still has the higher energy. How can on electron have 2 different energies at the same time.
Do you have any evidence for your idea or a way to experimentally show this is plausible?
Post by: ron123456 on 18/03/2022 01:33:58
The picture is relevant because with that wave machine, one downward motion at one end will produce a wave in a medium but with no radiating involved .....An EM transverse wave is radiated from an antenna fed by an oscillator....Oscillation is required, not just one downward motion like a quantum jump from one level to the next.The other thing is that it is possible to have no medium in outer space where a single excited atom may radiate, ?
Post by: Origin on 18/03/2022 12:39:03
.Oscillation is required, not just one downward motion like a quantum jump from one level to the next.You stated this a couple of times now. So again I ask, do you have any evidence this is true?
The other thing is that it is possible to have no medium in outer space where a single excited atom may radiate, ?Yes.
Post by: Bored chemist on 18/03/2022 13:01:07
Oscillation is required,No, it is not.
Again, the problem here is your lack of knowledge.
Go and learn more.
Post by: ron123456 on 18/03/2022 18:09:55
Post by: Colin2B on 18/03/2022 20:12:11
Every antenna that I have seen has required an oscillating voltage fed to it......This situation is not an antenna. Oscillation of the trigger eg electron is not required.
Consider a stone dropped into a pond. The stone does not oscillate, but it transfers energy to the water by displacing it and the waves propagate outwards.
Consider also a pendulum. Your hand does not need to oscillate, it applies a displacement to the pendulum which returns towards its ‘at rest’ position etc.
Similarly the electron in moving from one energy level to another causes a displacement of the electric field strength from its 0 position etc.
Post by: ron123456 on 18/03/2022 21:25:37
Post by: ron123456 on 20/03/2022 20:21:28
Post by: ron123456 on 20/03/2022 20:24:35
Post by: Colin2B on 20/03/2022 20:31:30
The stone dropped into a pond is a transverse wave propagating outward in a medium but will never radiateBut it does radiate, that’s what propagating outwards is. However, I think you are using radiate to mean in all directions, whereas I would use it even for a directional case.
The point is that in the cases I mentioned an oscillating trigger is not required in order to create a wave. If you if you apply a step input to an antenna you will get a pulse which propagates/radiates, and depending on the antenna, in all directions or in a particular direction.
In the case of atoms emitting emr, each electron transition creates a ripple (pulse) which propagates/radiates in one direction - what we measure as a photon. Multiple ripples from multiple atoms/electrons combine to create a wave effect. In the case of a tungsten filament these photons travel in all directions, in a laser only one direction.
if it possibly could (but it can't in this example even with the remaining of this sentence) unless brought back up and dropped into the pond again and again and again at such a high frequency that the wave will break up because it cannot keep up (oscillate)....In the case of an EM wave the break up field's trailing edge would be repulsed by the new non radiative (reactive) field and would radiate outward and propage with other Maxwell equations..........................In addition, the pond is a medium.....EM waves don't require a medium......This doesn’t make any sense at all.
Except that I agree “the pond is a medium.....EM waves don't require a medium” although I would say water is the medium rather than the pond.
Post by: ron123456 on 20/03/2022 20:38:32
Post by: Colin2B on 20/03/2022 20:50:52
Yes your philosophy will produce an EM but it will be local and will not breakaway and propagate....The problem with your hypothesis is that it does break away and does propagate.
You need to show experimental evidence to show otherwise. The step pulse into an antenna is an experiment I have performed. With atoms, the experiment has been performed many times to generate single photon emr, now a standard technique in many labs.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/03/2022 21:10:17
Please inform meI did.
Oscillation is required,No, it is not.
Again, the problem here is your lack of knowledge.
Go and learn more.
Post by: ron123456 on 22/03/2022 10:44:08
Post by: ron123456 on 22/03/2022 11:51:19