Current state of Quantum Mechanics does not help us visualize the
instant to instant orbital motion of the electron in Hydrogen atom.
Generally it is asserted that HUP does not permit us to do so. I have
developed a model for instant to instant computation of electron motion
in Hydrogen orbitals under Coulomb forces. I have not accounted for
electron spin interaction in this model. Kindly examine the details at
the following reference. This is essentially to assert the point that
we must strive to acquire enough information about a physical process
or phenomenon that should enable us to mentally visualize that
phenomenon.

http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...n_orbitals.pdf

GSS

GSS wrote:
Current state of Quantum Mechanics does not help us visualize the
instant to instant orbital motion of the electron in Hydrogen atom.
Generally it is asserted that HUP does not permit us to do so.

No, generally it is asserted that the electron is not spinning
around in a little orbit, as doing so would violate various
laws of physics (conservation of energy for instance).

- Randy

GSS wrote:
Current state of Quantum Mechanics does not help us visualize the
instant to instant orbital motion of the electron in Hydrogen atom.
Generally it is asserted that HUP does not permit us to do so. I have
developed a model for instant to instant computation of electron motion
in Hydrogen orbitals under Coulomb forces. I have not accounted for
electron spin interaction in this model. Kindly examine the details at
the following reference. This is essentially to assert the point that
we must strive to acquire enough information about a physical process
or phenomenon that should enable us to mentally visualize that
phenomenon.


You may be thinking too much like a Newtonian.

Some background to think about

o Photons are massless force carriers for the electromagnetic force
o Pauli Exclusion Principle
o Fine Structure Constant

"GSS" wrote in message
oups.com...
Current state of Quantum Mechanics does not help us visualize the
instant to instant orbital motion of the electron in Hydrogen atom.
Generally it is asserted that HUP does not permit us to do so. I have
developed a model for instant to instant computation of electron motion
in Hydrogen orbitals under Coulomb forces. I have not accounted for
electron spin interaction in this model. Kindly examine the details at
the following reference. This is essentially to assert the point that
we must strive to acquire enough information about a physical process
or phenomenon that should enable us to mentally visualize that
phenomenon.

http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...n_orbitals.pdf

You totally ignore synchrotron radiation.

--
rb

GSS wrote:
Current state of Quantum Mechanics does not help us visualize the
instant to instant orbital motion of the electron in Hydrogen atom.
Generally it is asserted that HUP does not permit us to do so. I have
developed a model for instant to instant computation of electron motion
in Hydrogen orbitals under Coulomb forces. I have not accounted for
electron spin interaction in this model. Kindly examine the details at
the following reference. This is essentially to assert the point that
we must strive to acquire enough information about a physical process
or phenomenon that should enable us to mentally visualize that
phenomenon.

http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...n_orbitals.pdf

GSS

I can agree with 50% of the content 50% of the time. In all the
the other cases there is a 50% chance you've told an outright fibber.
)

Sue...

GSS wrote:
[snip]
I have
developed a model for instant to instant computation of electron motion
in Hydrogen orbitals under Coulomb forces.
[snap]

You have very serious errors of logic before you even get to the model.
You have rejected quantum mechanics, yet you are using various of
the results of QM and not giving any support for them. The technical
term for this logic error is "stolen concept."

Instead of approaching this subject with bias and ignorance, of which
you have ample, you *could* start by doing some reading. There are
many books that describe the experiments that encouraged the
development of QM. You *could* read a few. Or even one.

As it stands, your web page is rubbish.
Socks

On a sunny day (Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:30:25 GMT) it happened Sam Wormley
wrote in l8Akg.33719$No1.10788@attbi_s71:


Some background to think about

o Photons are massless force carriers for the electromagnetic force

Why drive people crazy?
Photon is a wave.

OK, this is too much, but this 500 pound American did eat a whole
bottle of slimline pills, floated away, next time they make it to
the moon they will bring him back.

Anytime ---anybody--- says 'massless' (not mathless, we know that ;-))
for a 'particle' we know we are being conned.
Give it up Einstein (alias OneStone, probably he had this complex, like we
know here Dutch: 'Steen Der Wijzen', translates to 'Stone of Wisdom, that
what (how stupid and worthless -in wisdom- ) turns lead into gold, ALCHEMY
English, is it: 'Holy grail'? anyways Einstein had something with stones
and 'one' (the numer), hence Ein Stein (One Stone).. so and he failed of
course, and there exists no 'photon'.
Come to think of it 'one' number he had for light speed 2.

So, the avid reader ... LOL

Randy Poe wrote:
GSS wrote:
Current state of Quantum Mechanics does not help us visualize the
instant to instant orbital motion of the electron in Hydrogen atom.
Generally it is asserted that HUP does not permit us to do so.

No, generally it is asserted that the electron is not spinning
around in a little orbit, as doing so would violate various
laws of physics (conservation of energy for instance).

- Randy

No, the model is based on the conservation of energy and momentum. I
will appreciate if anyone can point out at least one specific mistake
in this model.

This model predicts that the time taken in the emission process of a
photon is of the order of 10^-16 seconds. Is there any corresponding
figure available either from Quantum Mechanics or from experiments?

GSS

Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:30:25 GMT) it happened Sam Wormley
wrote in l8Akg.33719$No1.10788@attbi_s71:



Some background to think about

o Photons are massless force carriers for the electromagnetic force


Why drive people crazy?
Photon is a wave.

OK, this is too much, but this 500 pound American did eat a whole
bottle of slimline pills, floated away, next time they make it to
the moon they will bring him back.

Anytime ---anybody--- says 'massless' (not mathless, we know that ;-))
for a 'particle' we know we are being conned.
Give it up Einstein (alias OneStone, probably he had this complex, like we
know here Dutch: 'Steen Der Wijzen', translates to 'Stone of Wisdom, that
what (how stupid and worthless -in wisdom- ) turns lead into gold, ALCHEMY
English, is it: 'Holy grail'? anyways Einstein had something with stones
and 'one' (the numer), hence Ein Stein (One Stone).. so and he failed of
course, and there exists no 'photon'.
Come to think of it 'one' number he had for light speed 2.

So, the avid reader ... LOL


Susskind: "The photon is very exceptional. It is the only particle,
other than the graviton [if it exists], that has no mass. What if it
were less exceptional and had mass? Feynman's theory tells us how to
compute the force when a hypothetical massive photon jumps between
nucleus and electron. What one finds is that the heavier the photon,
the less it is able to jump. Were the photon mass even a tiny fraction
of the electron mass, instead of being a long-range force, electric
interactions would become short-range "flypaper forces," totally
incapable of holding the distant valence electrons. Atoms, molecules,
and life [including Jan Panteltje] are entirely dependent on the
curious fact that the photon has no mass".

On a sunny day (Fri, 16 Jun 2006 18:24:23 GMT) it happened Sam Wormley
wrote in rHCkg.33881$No1.12216@attbi_s71:

Susskind: "The photon is very exceptional. It is the only particle,
other than the graviton [if it exists], that has no mass. What if it
were less exceptional and had mass? Feynman's theory tells us how to
compute the force when a hypothetical massive photon jumps between
nucleus and electron. What one finds is that the heavier the photon,
the less it is able to jump. Were the photon mass even a tiny fraction
of the electron mass, instead of being a long-range force, electric
interactions would become short-range "flypaper forces," totally
incapable of holding the distant valence electrons. Atoms, molecules,
and life [including Jan Panteltje] are entirely dependent on the
curious fact that the photon has no mass".

Yes Sam, photon has no mass (and no related math) BECAUSE IT DOES NOT EXISTS.
Light (EM energy) is a wave, a wave that possibly waves as some property of
something, maybe even particles... qantum vacuum, whatever.

One was still thinking Stone, billiard balls.