[alancalverd]

did you read page 12 and 13? have any questions?

start from atomic structure, if H atom is build by electron and proton only with 99% empty space, why there is no discharge? why matter is not compressible?

A big "if", and wrong. As you say, you have to start with atomic structure and develop a physical model that explains it. Pretending that it can't happen isn't allowed, because it does happen. So your chosen model is wrong because it doesn't explain the obvious facts. You can't derive quantum mechanics from classical electrostatics.   

[jccc]

can you proof that light is not gravitational wave produced by exited atoms?

A gravitational wave would be detectable on the exit side of a thin sheet of metal.

solar cells transfer gravity wave into current all the time. green leaves transfer gravity wave into food.

[jeffreyH]

If opposite charges are meant to combine then why does the neutron decay? I have deja vu here.

[jccc]

If opposite charges are meant to combine then why does the neutron decay? I have deja vu here.

why people got married? never seen divorce?

[jeffreyH]

If opposite charges are meant to combine then why does the neutron decay? I have deja vu here.

why people got married? never seen divorce?

You aren't here to learn.

[jccc]

the most beautiful thing in the universe is not mystery, but your mind.

without mind, there's nothing.

[alancalverd]

solar cells transfer gravity wave into current all the time. green leaves transfer gravity wave into food.

Repeating an obvious untruth won't make it true, or even amusing.

[jccc]

solar cells transfer gravity wave into current all the time. green leaves transfer gravity wave into food.

Repeating an obvious untruth won't make it true, or even amusing.

are you talking about qm? graviton or photon? I told you long ago.

[JohnDuffield]

He is supposed to have said "'You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother"

Wrong. I checked with an Einstein historian and was told that it's a myth.

That's why I said supposed.

[Ophiolite]

You can only claim an atom is >99% empty space if you insist that electrons each exist at a single point. They don't. They exist as a probability cloud. Those clouds interact in various ways and are responsible for the lack of compression you think should be present.

[jccc]

i claim nothing.

i ask if standard atomic model is correct, why matter is not compressible? why there is no discharge within atoms?

obviously atom is not 99% empty space. the space between nucleus and electrons must have a force field that balances the attraction so electron able to stay floating.

haven't see any legit answer, do you have 1?

[alancalverd]

You are still asking the question backwards. Here is the modern formulation:

The atom has a finite diameter. From what we know of its structure, can we derive classical electrostatics?

The answer is yes. Quantum mechanics (which provides an accurate description of atomic structure) degenerates to classical electrostatics (an adequate approximation of the behaviour of charged bodies) when the separation between charged bodies is large. 

Beware of using outdated models in science. Not everyone understands them anymore, and some may think you are being obtuse..

[jccc]

you are at it again.

why is matter not compressible? why is no discharge within atoms? if stand model is correct?

[jccc]

Pete is the only 1 has the merit to admit he has no answer to my questions.

you act like a kid of science. Please remember everything you posted in this thread will be reading by many.

ever thought how your students will think about your postings?

[David Cooper]

why is matter not compressible?

It is compressible - it just puts up a very good fight, though it doesn't do so well in neutron stars, and it loses comprehensively in black holes.

[jccc]

if atom is like alan's tent, give 100 atm alan will become a meat ball.

[alancalverd]

if stand model is correct?

For the third and final time, what you call the "standard model" is WRONG for the very reason you give. Please take a deep breath and give your brain a chance to recover!

If a hypothesis does not fit the facts, the hypothesis is wrong. In the case of the atom, everyone else, from the dumbest schoolboy to several Nobel prizewinners,  recognised this about 100 years ago which is why we have quantum mechanics instead of classical electron orbits.

This is a science board. Scientists abandon models that don't work, so don't expect anyone here to play with your outdated and broken toys. I'm sure there are boards where people happily repeat nonsense ad infintum in the hope that someone will take them seriously, and I'm sure you would be a welcome guest.

[jccc]

you are kidding yourself again.

can you debunk any thing i posted about gravity, atomic structure and light? what are you waiting for?

[PmbPhy]

For the third and final time, what you call the "standard model" is WRONG for the very reason you give.

I missed what he said and your response. Are you saying that the "standard model" as he thinks of it is wrong or are you saying that the actual standard model is wrong and if so, why?

By "Standard Model" I mean the one defined here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model

[Ethos_]

you are kidding yourself again.

can you debunk any thing i posted about gravity, atomic structure and light? what are you waiting for?

It's not our responsibility to prove you wrong, it's up to you to show us evidence in support of your theory. So far, little if any has been presented.

It isn't good enough to simply challenge someone to prove a negative. If you seek acceptance, you will be required to provide your own evidence. Saying "prove me wrong" will get you nowhere.