The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. Atomic structure theory
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Atomic structure theory

  • 38 Replies
  • 7469 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #20 on: 24/03/2019 06:15:39 »
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 06:11:38
There are forces in space, there is no field in space.

What is field? What carried field? How field act with matter? What is the mechanism?

Your questions are answered in that article I linked in your other thread.

Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 06:13:54
Not the air in the tube but the copper tube conducts EM wave.

How?
Logged
 



Offline seeker3 (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 278
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #21 on: 24/03/2019 06:23:21 »
EM wave is vibrating electric force propagating through matter produced mechanical wave.

There is no EM wave in space. Energy/light/EM wave teleport between matters through the levity between matters.

Very nice discussing with you, be back soon!
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #22 on: 24/03/2019 06:25:33 »
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 06:23:21
EM wave is vibrating electric force propagating through matter produced mechanical wave.

There is no EM wave in space. Energy/light/EM wave teleport between matters through the levity between matters.

Again, what experiment demonstrated these things?
Logged
 

Offline seeker3 (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 278
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #23 on: 24/03/2019 06:35:34 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 24/03/2019 06:25:33
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 06:23:21
EM wave is vibrating electric force propagating through matter produced mechanical wave.

There is no EM wave in space. Energy/light/EM wave teleport between matters through the levity between matters.

Again, what experiment demonstrated these things?

What experiment demonstrated those thing are not facts?
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    11.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #24 on: 24/03/2019 09:32:13 »
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 06:35:34
What experiment demonstrated those thing are not facts?

If the light travels in the copper,rather than in the hole, how come you can't look through a bar of copper in the same way you can look through a copper pipe?

Any measurements of how well light gets through copper meet the criterion you set.
The experiment is more often done with gold- a thin enough gold foil lets some light through.
But the light simply will not pass through anything but tiny thicknesses  of metal.

Another problem with your idea is that, if it was true that the em radiation travelled in the copper (or other metal) of the pipe then the material in the pipe wouldn't affect that radiation.
But if you add dye to some water then put it in a pipe and look through it, you can see the colour.

That experiment is the basis for much of the science of spectroscopy.
So you are plainly wrong- the light goes down  the hole in the tube.




You really need to learn more about science before you try to say it's wrong.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



Offline seeker3 (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 278
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #25 on: 24/03/2019 11:27:50 »
Light wave propagate through the color water in the pipe, not the hole.
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #26 on: 24/03/2019 11:31:51 »
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 01:37:26
Atomic structure

See the universe from an atom. Without understanding the precise structure and mechanism of atoms, most science theories cannot be true.

Theory says a hydrogen atom is made from 1 electron and 1 proton. The electron is circling/waving/clouding around the proton to form a stable atom.

This is impossible, because there is only one force exists between 1 proton and 1 electron at distance r, the strongest attraction force in nature F=Ke x pq/rr. According to physics laws, the two particles must collide under that force. Electron is impossible to wave/cloud/orbit around proton to form a stable atom.

Theory says atoms are 99.99% empty space. This is impossible, because matters are not 99.99% compressible.


New atomic model of a hydrogen atom

1 electron carries 1 negative charge.

If we smash the electron into 1000000 equal pieces, each piece will carry 1/1000000 negative charge. Let's call it enertron.

Since enertrons carry the same negative charge, they repel each other.

If we have a perfect bottle, which means no leakage, no react, like glass bottle to air.

We put 1000000 enertrons into the perfect bottle. since enertrons repel each other, they put a pressure on the bottle wall. let's measure and call that pressure 1 volt.

If we put 8000000 enertrons into the same bottle, the pressure on the wall should be 4 volt.

Now if 1 enertron is moving or vibrating, the rest all enertrons will be energized.

That is the mechanism of light/quantum/em wave.

Now if we put 1 positive charge into the perfect bottle, what will happen?

The enertrons should be attracted by the positive charge and form a ball around it, the closer to the positive charge the denser enertron cloud. the density of the enertron is decay at 1/rrr due to the repulsion force between enertrons decay at 1/rr.

Now image enertron is the real thing, it carries a tiny negative charge, something like 1/10^33 electron charge, but it has a stronger force field, similar to neodymium magnet compare with a ceramic magnet.

Image proton actually carries 918 positive charges, it attracted 917 total charges of enertrons formed an elastic ball, 1 electron attached to the ball to form a neutrally charged hydrogen atom. 1 atomic weight equals to 1936 total charges, no matter positive or negative charges.

This is the realistic atomic structure. The electrons are constantly vibrating due to the kinetic energy they carry.

Atoms are solid balls, that's why the matter is not compressible.

If atoms are constructed as science told you, 99.99% empty space, why matter is not compressible? Electron shell/wave/cloud/orbital are negatively charged, it does not stick to positive changed nuclear is a magic, how can it stand any pressure without crashing?

Why is energy conserved?

If you put a moving force on any enerctrons in the perfect bottle, that emf is spreading to all the lines of sight enertrons instantly by the repulsion force between them f=Ke x ee/rr, they all are moving now, and cannot stop ever.

Do we have a perfect bottle?

Yes, every atom is a perfect bottle. all matters are a perfect bottle. Atom's binding force locked charged particles within it, energy has nowhere to go but bounce within and between matters. Every atom is a perpetual machine. The universe is a perpetual machine.

The forces f=Ke x e1e2/rr and f=G x m1m2/rr are like perfect springs between matters, connected all matters in 1.
It sounds to me like you are trying to ''paint the atom a different colour '' , it already has a negative charge , renaming it doesn't make a difference .

Quote
If we smash the electron into 1000000 equal pieces, each piece will carry 1/1000000 negative charge

Splitting almost 0 dimensions into 1000000 might be very difficult , have you thought this through ?
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #27 on: 24/03/2019 13:58:56 »
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 06:35:34
What experiment demonstrated those thing are not facts?

You are shifting the burden of proof. You don't start off with an idea and assume that it is correct until proven wrong. That's not how science works.

Another way that we know light travels at light speed through space is the time delay when scientists communicate with spacecraft and probes around and on other planets. When scientists send instructions to rovers on Mars, they have to wait anywhere from 4 to 24 minutes for the rover to react and then wait another 4 to 24 minutes for video footage of the rover's movements to arrive back to Earth. If electromagnetic waves "teleported", as you put it, then there would be no signal delay: http://blogs.esa.int/mex/2012/08/05/time-delay-between-mars-and-earth/
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    11.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #28 on: 24/03/2019 14:13:56 »
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 11:27:50
Light wave propagate through the color water in the pipe, not the hole.
You missed the difficult bit.
If light travels through metal, how come you can not see through a metal bar like you can see through a pipe?
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



Offline seeker3 (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 278
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #29 on: 24/03/2019 19:19:33 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 24/03/2019 14:13:56
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 11:27:50
Light wave propagate through the color water in the pipe, not the hole.
You missed the difficult bit.
If light travels through metal, how come you can not see through a metal bar like you can see through a pipe?

Light don't travel through metal but reflect from the surface of the copper pipe.
Logged
 

Offline seeker3 (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 278
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #30 on: 24/03/2019 19:23:05 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 24/03/2019 13:58:56
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 06:35:34
What experiment demonstrated those thing are not facts?

You are shifting the burden of proof. You don't start off with an idea and assume that it is correct until proven wrong. That's not how science works.

Another way that we know light travels at light speed through space is the time delay when scientists communicate with spacecraft and probes around and on other planets. When scientists send instructions to rovers on Mars, they have to wait anywhere from 4 to 24 minutes for the rover to react and then wait another 4 to 24 minutes for video footage of the rover's movements to arrive back to Earth. If electromagnetic waves "teleported", as you put it, then there would be no signal delay: http://blogs.esa.int/mex/2012/08/05/time-delay-between-mars-and-earth/

How do you know that is not fake news just like LIGO detected gravity wave from 1.3 billion years ago? Gravity is instantaneous due to forces are coexisted with matters.
Logged
 

Offline seeker3 (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 278
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #31 on: 24/03/2019 19:41:31 »
If light travels in space at light speed, if photon is real particle carrying momentum and able to knock out electron from solar cell, why light cannot accelerate solar wind to light speed?

Why laser weapons have no kinetic impact? Why light mill dies not spin in hard vacuum? Why photons don't slow down in water like bullets? Why photon accelerate from water to air?
Logged
 

Offline seeker3 (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 278
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #32 on: 24/03/2019 19:55:27 »
Solar wind accelerated by photons 8 minutes from the Sun to ISS, light speed electrons and protons are hitting ISS.

ISS has no magnetic field to deflect those high speed particles, are they in danger?

Why can't ISS catch those solar wind to make hydrogen fuel?
Logged
 



Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    11.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #33 on: 24/03/2019 20:31:37 »
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 19:19:33
Quote from: Bored chemist on 24/03/2019 14:13:56
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 11:27:50
Light wave propagate through the color water in the pipe, not the hole.
You missed the difficult bit.
If light travels through metal, how come you can not see through a metal bar like you can see through a pipe?

Light don't travel through metal but reflect from the surface of the copper pipe.
No, if that was true then looking through a copper pipe would make everything "copper coloured" like it does if you view its reflection in a polished copper plate or something.

You really are just wrong.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    11.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #34 on: 24/03/2019 20:34:02 »
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 19:41:31
why light cannot accelerate solar wind to light speed?
Conservation of energy (and momentum)
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 19:41:31
Why laser weapons have no kinetic impact?
It does- though the effect is very small compared to the other effects.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • ********
  • 11035
  • Activity:
    9%
  • Thanked: 1486 times
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #35 on: 24/03/2019 20:37:56 »
Quote from: seeker3
That is EM wave propagating ia a copper tube, not vacuum space.
Are you referring to the use of a copper tube as a waveguide?
It is true that the velocity of light in a waveguide can differ from the speed of light in open space.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waveguide

However, the velocity of electromagnetic radiation from the GPS satellites is carefully monitored, as it affects the accuracy of the GPS receivers.
These satellites orbit at a height of 20,000km, so most of the path is in a vacuum; only the last 100km experiences a significant pressure of air.
And the newer satellites transmit on 2 different frequencies, so they can better allow for (and remove) atmospheric effects.

Quote
Only matter can move, curve, expend or compress. Space contains no matter.
Space does contain matter, which we can see at great distances - it is in the form of stars.

So we can measure the expansion of space by looking at how it affects the light from distant stars (and conglomerations of stars: "galaxies"). It affects this light by red-shifting it, as Kryptid said.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

Quote
if photon is real particle carrying momentum and able to knock out electron from solar cell
Solar cells are not made from insulators, so the electrons are not tied to individual atoms. Insulators tend to need ultraviolet photons to kick an electron entirely out of an atom.

However, solar cells are made from semiconductors, where electrons do not have specific energies, but the electron energy falls in a broad band. Part of this band is called the "conduction band", as it allows electrons to flow through the material. So the photon does not need enough energy to eject an electron from the atom, but only enough to overcome the bandgap, and promote the electron into the conduction band.

For silicon solar cells, the energy required is in the infra-red part of the spectrum, where the Sun puts out most of its energy.

Quote
Solar wind accelerated by photons
The Solar Wind is transparent, which means that it doesn't interact strongly with light.

Bursts of solar wind (solar storms) are accelerated by reconnection of magnetic fields in the Sun's outer atmosphere.
The Parker Solar probe is going to explore the Sun's magnetic field.
https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/parker-solar-probe

Quote
ISS has no magnetic field to deflect those high speed particles, are they in danger?
The ISS orbit is within the Earth's magnetic field, so they are partially protected.

However, they lack the additional protection of Earth's atmosphere, so in case of a solar storm, they retreat to the more robust Soyuz capsule.

Quote
Why can't ISS catch those solar wind to make hydrogen fuel?
The solar wind has extremely low density, so it is hard to catch - and most of it is already diverted by the Earth's magnetic field.

Hydrogen by itself doesn't make fuel for a chemical rocket, as hydrogen doesn't burn in space. You also need oxygen (or similar) to produce energy and thrust. And the solar wind doesn't contain useful amounts of oxygen.

But maybe one day we will be able to control hydrogen fusion, and then collecting hydrogen from space might be a useful source of energy for a spacecraft...
Logged
 

Offline seeker3 (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 278
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #36 on: 24/03/2019 20:38:48 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 24/03/2019 20:31:37
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 19:19:33
Quote from: Bored chemist on 24/03/2019 14:13:56
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 11:27:50
Light wave propagate through the color water in the pipe, not the hole.
You missed the difficult bit.
If light travels through metal, how come you can not see through a metal bar like you can see through a pipe?

Light don't travel through metal but reflect from the surface of the copper pipe.
No, if that was true then looking through a copper pipe would make everything "copper coloured" like it does if you view its reflection in a polished copper plate or something.

You really are just wrong.
Light wave propagate through air in the pipe.
Logged
 



Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #37 on: 24/03/2019 21:56:44 »
Quote from: seeker3 on 24/03/2019 19:23:05
How do you know that is not fake news just like LIGO detected gravity wave from 1.3 billion years ago?

Oh, so you're a conspiracy theorist too, huh? Do you have evidence for such a conspiracy? And before you say it, reporting results that are at odds with your ideas is not evidence of a conspiracy. I want to see actual evidence, such as testimony from whistle-blowers, leaked documents, secretly-recorded conversations, etc.
Logged
 

Offline mad aetherist

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 791
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 16 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Atomic structure theory
« Reply #38 on: 24/03/2019 22:49:39 »
Allow me to butt in re em waves travelling along copper etc -- em waves do not travel in copper. 
Catt showed that em waves travelled throo the space or medium surrounding the copper, the speed being c/n, the n being the refraction index for the medium.
And me (m.e.)(mad aetherist) explained in another thread (re the Catt question) that the em radiation travelling tween a pair of conductors travelled from conductor to conductor, & from conductor to conductor, both ways, simultaneously, at up to 5c kmps in the nearfield (or at up to 5c/n).

Hmmmmm -- why duznt anyone call it me radiation (ie magnetoelectric radiation)(not important).
« Last Edit: 24/03/2019 22:53:41 by mad aetherist »
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.544 seconds with 67 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.