Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: bz <bz+spr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 23:58:43 +0000 (UTC)
"guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx" <guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:1178142990.583307.260730@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
A sufficiently conformative and simplistic geometry (of forces) is
needed since the electron valence is a sufficiently conformative
(integer numeral valences) and a simplistic atomic behavior (the
opposite of complex atomic behavior patterns).
how about translating THAT into english? I have no idea what you are trying
to say.
--
bz
please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.
bz+spr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- References:
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: bz
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: bz
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- Prev by Date: Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- Next by Date: Re: Creationist young-Earth Perspective on Ewald Oseen Extinction
- Previous by thread: Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- Next by thread: Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- Index(es):
Loading