[jccc]

an atom has mass m, vibrates at f times per second, it will seed mfc^2/t energy/force out as gravity wave. the nature of the force wave is electrostatic force.

light is not wave nor particle, light is gravitational pause produced by exited atoms.

Science has never been absolute, what makes you think today's science is all correct? In fact, science is so fucked up. Present theories of atomic structure, gravity and light are all wrong.

 

[jeffreyH]

an atom has mass m, vibrates at f times per second, it will seed mfc^2/t energy/force out as gravity wave. the nature of the force wave is electrostatic force.

light is not wave nor particle, light is gravitational pause produced by exited atoms.

Science has never been absolute, what makes you think today's science is all correct? In fact, science is so f***ed up. Present theories of atomic structure, gravity and light are all wrong.

What you are trying to say here with this mfc^2/t is that energy multiplied by the frequency of phonon vibrations over time causes gravity. In the case where the phonon vibrations are not regular your energy source will be pulsating and some of this energy is released as gravity. The problems are 1) your mass would be gone very quickly and 2) you would need to prove that all phonon vibrations are irregular. I know energy is a difficult concept but I have never heard of anyone using phonons in this way. What may be possible is that the vibrational energy causes ripples (waves) in the gravitational field without loss of energy. The problem with this is tying it to a force that is all attractive. I have no idea where you would even start on that one so good luck I await your results. I may be waiting an awfully long time.

[jccc]

we need to start from the light source. if atoms are like qm suggested, 99% empty space, why is water/matter not compressible? why there is no discharge between proton and electron? obviously the empty space is not empty.

[PmbPhy]

we need to start from the light source. if atoms are like qm suggested, 99% empty space, why is water/matter not compressible?

It is compressible. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Properties_of_water#Compressibility

[jccc]

we need to start from the light source. if atoms are like qm suggested, 99% empty space, why is water/matter not compressible?

It is compressible. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Properties_of_water#Compressibility

water's compressibility is about 10 ^-10, sounds like 99% empty space to you?

how about the discharge? is the empty space such a good insulator?

[PmbPhy]

water's compressibility is about 10 ^-10, sounds like 99% empty space to you?

how about the discharge? is the empty space such a good insulator?

I answered your question about the compressibility of water, not about how much empty space there is. They are not directly related. And the amount of space taken up can be thought of in two ways; one in which one only considers the volume of the particles and one in which one considers the atom as a whole, i.e. the space in which the electron cloud exists. In the first case the volume of the particles is a great deal less than 1%.

[jccc]

we need to start from the light source. if atoms are like qm suggested, 99% empty space, why is water/matter not compressible?

It is compressible. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Properties_of_water#Compressibility

water's compressibility is about 10 ^-10, sounds like 99% empty space to you?

how about the discharge? is the empty space such a good insulator?

what's your answer?

[PmbPhy]

what's your answer?

I don't have an answer. Who ever said I know everything!

[jccc]

thank you Pete!

all my respect to you.

[PmbPhy]

thank you Pete!

all my respect to you.

You're welcome.  [^]

[alancalverd]

We do know all those things. You just don't understand the mathematics.

It's not unusual to find incomprehension masquerading as superior knowledge - that is, after all, the basis of many religions.

[jccc]

We do know all those things. You just don't understand the mathematics.

It's not unusual to find incomprehension masquerading as superior knowledge - that is, after all, the basis of many religions.

what thing do you know? why water is not compressible if there is 99% empty space in atoms?

[PmbPhy]

you don't even understand how atoms are formed, .you don't know why is electron not stick to proton, you don't know why water is not compressible, you don;t know why there is no discharge in atoms,

When I said that I don't know what "how about the discharge? is the empty space such a good insulator?" means, no physicists has all that kind of data in their minds. When we need to know something we either calculate it or look it up. Which ever is the most convenient.

[jccc]

a matter/mass/charge has force/gravitational field, if the matter moves, the field follows. if the matter vibrates, the field follows.

if the sun has a big ejection/quake, we should be able to detect it 500 seconds later. we might even have a earthquake.

atoms, each has mass, when atoms exited, their fields exited, within that field, you feel light.

[David Cooper]

what thing do you know? why water is not compressible if there is 99% empty space in atoms?

Water is compressible - it just takes an extremely high force to compress it to a significant degree.

[jccc]

what thing do you know? why water is not compressible if there is 99% empty space in atoms?

Water is compressible - it just takes an extremely high force to compress it to a significant degree.

right, 10^-10. why? if it is 99% empty. what force canceled pressure?

[David Cooper]

It isn't just water. Think about rock, metal, wood, etc.

With a gas, it's easy to comress it because the molecules start far apart, and the forces keeping them apart come from impact collision energy (temperature). In water you don't have that situation because the molecules are packed tightly together already, so to push them closer together you have to push against the forces that hold atoms apart. I don't understand how atoms are held apart at the distance they are, but a simple way of understanding how two things can in principle maintain a fixed separation would be to imagine two forces, one pulling two items together and the other pushing the two items apart, but with the one pushing apart decaying more quickly over distance. This results in strong repulsion when they get close together, but there will be a distance apart where the two items attract and repel each other equally, and that's where they will naturally sit. It's easier to pull them apart from there than it is to push them closer together, so breaking them apart can be done with relatively low force while trying to compress them is extremely hard and gets enormously harder for each extra bit of compression.

[Note: I have not posted to this thread at all, but my posts (along with some others around them) were moved here from a different thread as they were part of an off-topic conversation.]

[alancalverd]

what thing do you know? why water is not compressible if there is 99% empty space in atoms?

Water is compressible - it just takes an extremely high force to compress it to a significant degree.

right, 10^-10. why? if it is 99% empty. what force canceled pressure?

What makes you think it's 99% empty? In my glass, it's 100% water. Your failure to understand molecular orbital energetics is sad, but by no means unique. That's what distinguishes scientists from the ineducable.

[jccc]

what thing do you know? why water is not compressible if there is 99% empty space in atoms?

Water is compressible - it just takes an extremely high force to compress it to a significant degree.

right, 10^-10. why? if it is 99% empty. what force canceled pressure?

What makes you think it's 99% empty? In my glass, it's 100% water. Your failure to understand molecular orbital energetics is sad, but by no means unique. That's what distinguishes scientists from the ineducable.

what is water? h2o, 3 atoms together, each atom has a nucleus, has electron orbitals, and 99.99% empty space. isn't that's the standard model?

https://www.google.com/
search?q=atom+standard+model&espv=2&biw=1242&bih=606&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=

[jeffreyH]

Pseudoscience is disputing established science with claims that do not stand up to scrutiny. I think it's on topic. It exemplifies the lack of understanding that leads to pseudoscience. It can also be tied to a lack of understanding of the history and philosophy of science. This is a typical case. If jccc thinks it is extraordinary that so much space could exist in atomic structure then the orbital distance between the sun and neptune must also be wrong.