Re: OOPS! Re: Part 2 Re: Ken, need help with this

From: Pax (pax1_at_whitesweb.com)
Date: 10/28/04 

Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 01:35:59 GMT

"Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote in message
news:2202379a.0410231419.51fa5c5d@posting.google.com...
> "Pax" <pax1@whitesweb.com> wrote in message
news:<UHped.8849$Lk3.2921@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
> > "Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote in message
> > news:2202379a.0410221134.38e3c337@posting.google.com...
> > > "Pax" <pax1@whitesweb.com> wrote in message
> > news:<7I_dd.8758$q%7.4842@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>...
> > > > Guess it would help if I included the link if I want you read
something,
> > > > huh? :)
> > > >
> > > > Link added in context below:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Pax" <pax1@whitesweb.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:gC_dd.8756$q%7.6805@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> > > > > "Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote in message
> > > > > news:2202379a.0410210101.5f38706a@posting.google.com...
> > > > > > "Pax" <pax1@whitesweb.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:<LSqdd.7823$Lk3.5266@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
> > > > > > > Part 2 of "Re: Ken, need help with this"... continuation of
Part 1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:2202379a.0410150154.2fe4ed05@posting.google.com...
> > > > > > > > "Pax" <pax1@whitesweb.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > news:<e Fbd.4721$Lk3.2906@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
> > >
> > >
> > > [Ken]
> > > When a photon is absorbed by an atomic antenna that consists of a
nucleus and an electron, an equal EM energy is absorbed by both the -charge
and the +charge according to their charge magnitude, (not according to their
respective masses).
> > >
> > > The photon only sees the charges, and in the case of hydrogen the
nuclear and electronic charges are the same.
> > >
> > > But because the inertial mass of the charge is so much less than a
protons, (~1/1834) it is the electron that exhibits the greatest *recoil*
and gets the attention.
> > >
> > > As a result a common misconception results that the electron is
absorbing the energy and the nucleus is passive. IMHO that's not true when
you get down and dirty...let's get down and dirty...it's an equal thing,
I'll push my point by stating "the absorption of a photon by an atom creates
an equal and opposite reaction on the nucleus and the electron", sound
familiar, I'm aping Newton's 3rd.
> > > But the most disconcernible measurement, for many reasons, is
focused on how the electron reacts, and the part the nucleus plays is
relegated to a passive role.
> >
> > [Pax]
> > First, it's commonly accepted that an electron takes on or emits a
photon when it "jumps" rings in the atom's shell. But, what you're saying is
that the action by the electron is initiated through a joint action/reaction
of the nucleus-electron construct, and both the electron and the nucleus
absorb part of the photon's energy. Is that correct?
>
> [Ken]
> Yes, (IMHO) the EM energy absorbed by an atom from a photon causes a
relative separation of the nucleus and the electron.
> Relatively, the nucleus "moves" away from the electron as far as the
electron moves from the nucleus.
> To say one moved and the other didn't, from the prespective of
relativity is a matter of convention.

[Pax]
True. From what I can find on the subject, think it's accepted that the
nucleus does move too, even though it's so much larger than the electron its
movement is negligible. That would mean the nucleus does absorb at least
some of the energy.

> > [Pax]
> > Sounds interesting, and it's logical... going to have to think about it
for a while. :)
> >
> > > [Ken]
> > > Hope you understand a wee bit...
> >
> > [Pax]
> > Trying to. :)
>
> Thanks
> Ken

Be well :) - Pax

.~*~._.~*~._.~*~._.~*~._.~*~._.~*~._.~*~._.~*~._.~*~.

May people say of you:
"The world is a better place because you are in it."

>From Andromeda:
"Dillon Hunt, there are three kinds of people in this
universe, those who can count, and those who can't."

We sit inside the impossible and say the impossible
is impossible.

Relevant Pages