"Y.Porat" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Wormly yess indeed e;ectrons are resopnsible for the chemical
prooerties of molecules

yet it is still not known that there is a direct connectionbetween
nuclear structure and atomic structure

The connection might well not be known to you, but it would be quite
wrong of you to extrapolate from there to saying that this ignorance
is general.

If you ask nicely, I will tell you what the connection is.

[snip]

Franz

Frantz
i am afraied you dint read my last thread and more sad
i am afriedyou didnt understtod it
so enough with hand waving and lets be more specific:

you probably saw the thread of wormly
i think it is called 'scintists suceeded to .... view
(or something else ) the structure of the electron distribution
of the molecule N2 right ? so ......
please let us know acording to your theories and knowlwdge and
understanding :
why do we see there two orbital spread at opposite sides of that N2
while we know
*that the valence of N is 3 (again 3)
TIA
Y.Porat
--------------------------------

"Y.Porat" wrote in message
ups.com...
Frantz
i am afraied you dint read my last thread and more sad
i am afriedyou didnt understtod it
so enough with hand waving and lets be more specific:

you probably saw the thread of wormly
i think it is called 'scintists suceeded to .... view
(or something else ) the structure of the electron distribution
of the molecule N2 right ? so ......
please let us know acording to your theories and knowlwdge and
understanding :
why do we see there two orbital spread at opposite sides of that N2
while we know
*that the valence of N is 3 (again 3)

In the note to which I responded, you asked about the connection
between nuclear structure and atomic structure.
You appear to have ducked away from that.

Franz

No!!
my explanation of the latest data presentd by Wormly
about sort of 'seeing' the N2 atom and its electrons orbitals

my explanation is a direct outcome of the *nuclear structure*
of the nitroge atom
first you have to understand my explanation
if not
you can ask your friend Buerbacher who got my book years ago
the book is 'A model of the nucleus and the Atom'
it was written more than 10 years ago
you can ask him wether i just 'drawed that explanation just now
or wether it is based on my model long ago much before (10 tears!)
before i first saw - last a few weeks ago
the new 'view' of N2.
----------------------
now
in that book one can find the *nuclear structure of the nitrigen atom
(amond the description of all the elements of the periodic table-
Nitrogen is just 'small cash' there)
(again = the nuclear structue!1)

but not only nuclear - the atomic as well
the atomic is a direct tangible extention of the nuclear structure.

ie the electrons are 'steming' only from specific locations of the nuc.
in another place i explained there the tripple bond say of carbon
and that is as well a direct result of nuclear *and atomic * structure

Carbon and Nitrogen are very close elements with only a slight
diffence
of one nuclear orbilal
the Nitrogen has a deuteron orbital which the Carbon does not have

it is diracted n one of the tetraheder structlre of it

so if 3 electroj orbitals are connected to the other 3 of the second
Nitrogen
the deutron orbital is directed just *perpendicular* to that 'bundle'
of two nitrogens (connected in a triple bond- even a double bond will
give
a similar structure in which the free orbital is directed outwards
of that bundle and that is what we wee in the new special view
of N2 presents
now
is there an existing explanation of qm (before!! my above explanation)
that is (actually not *is* but *was*!! preceeding my explanation??
TIA
Y.Porat
----------------

if you thinkl that i just drawed it from my s

"Y.Porat" wrote in message
oups.com...
No!!
my explanation of the latest data presentd by Wormly


Wormley


about sort of 'seeing' the N2 atom and its electrons orbitals

my explanation is a direct outcome of the *nuclear structure*
of the nitroge atom


Go and take a runnoing jump at yourself.
I did not want yet another repeat of your "explanation".
I have heard you spew that nonsense many times.
I want some actual caclulations, or a link to such calculations
You did not provide anything of the kind.
Now go away, you miserable failure.


first you have to understand my explanation
if not
you can ask your friend Buerbacher


Feuerbacher


who got my book years ago
the book is 'A model of the nucleus and the Atom'

I know. He trashed it publicly and completely.

it was written more than 10 years ago
you can ask him wether i just 'drawed that explanation just now
or wether it is based on my model long ago much before (10 tears!)
before i first saw - last a few weeks ago
the new 'view' of N2.
----------------------
now
in that book one can find the *nuclear structure of the nitrigen
atom
(amond the description of all the elements of the periodic table-
Nitrogen is just 'small cash' there)
(again = the nuclear structue!1)

You seem not to realise that the recent work is not connected with
nuclear structure, but with the electronic structure of an atom

but not only nuclear - the atomic as well
the atomic is a direct tangible extention of the nuclear structure.

Balls. As far as the electrons are concerned, the nucleus is a small
ball of charge, mass and a variety of other properties, with
dimensions a few thousand times smaller than the orbitals.

ie the electrons are 'steming' only from specific locations of the
nuc.

Rubbish, whatever "steming" might be
That model will not allow you to calculate the spectral frequencies of
even the simplest of atoms.
Feel free to prove me wrong.

in another place i explained there the tripple bond say of carbon
and that is as well a direct result of nuclear *and atomic *
structure

Not at all. It is a result purely of the electron orbitals. The
nucleus acts simply as the source of a central force.

Carbon and Nitrogen are very close elements with only a slight
diffence
of one nuclear orbilal
the Nitrogen has a deuteron orbital which the Carbon does not have

All deuteron orbitals are identical with hydrogen orbitals, except for
a slightly different reduced mass.

it is diracted n one of the tetraheder structlre of it

Decidedly not. The spectral frequencies of all the major levels of
the nitrogen atom have been calculated, as have the relative line
intensities as a function of temperature. The calculations agree
entirely with the experimentally observed quantities, to the extent
that these results are now in daily use by astronomers who are
investigating stellar structure.
I am sure those folk would appreciate it if you would publish values
for those quantities which are more reliable than the current ones..

Sorry, but the rest was old junk which I have heard befoore from you,
so I took the liberty of snipping it.

[snip]

Franz

Hi old demagogue
it seems that you are alost case
as far as new findings are concerned
you are too old to learn something new

you understood nothing of my explanations
may be not all laong your fault
you cant understand it without having my book
antway
you are complelely parroting old stuff and unable to renew anything
moreover
you are disturbing
that is all your 'contribution

2 you didnrt explain the pictures presents newly) by Wormleys thread
just shear hand waving
while i expalined it in detaile
you personally di dt do it you just hand waved that
*others did it *
btw how could others do it while it is a new experimental data
antway
i donrt whant to waste my time and enegy of a dead duck. like you.
i am waiting fo rmore cleaver, and not least more decent people, than
you.
By
Y.Porat
-----------------------------------