Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: bz <bz+spr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 09:32:16 +0000 (UTC)
"guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx" <guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:1178686901.552915.67220@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
On May 8, 3:40 pm, bz <bz+...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The explanation given athttp://bethe.cornell.edu/
(if I understood it correctly) is that 'not even the electrons know
where they are' to a high enough accuracy to be able to 'accelerate'
while they are in their 'orbitals'.
Their location is so uncertain that the probability plots ARE the
correct 'picture'.
They say you can know when you know their location, you can't know
their velocity ....and vice-versa?
'they' are only approximately correct.
(and/or the more you know their location, the less you know their
velocity)
In order for electrons to 'orbit', the electrons must know their own
location and their own velocity, otherwise they can not follow the path of
an orbit, but they can not. Therefore they do not orbit.
---------------------------------------
But from what you wrote above it's saying only possible to know the
PROBABILITY of their location....this is conflicting from the
definition I wrote above??
Follow the reference given. Listen to the lectures.
--
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
- 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
- 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: The_Man
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: bz
- Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- From: The_Man
- 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: V^2 = V1 x V2 anyone know his geometry??
- Next by Date: Re: Light Sources Simultaneously in Multiple Frames of Reference
- Previous by thread: Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- Next by thread: Re: Bohr's Atom still number one
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|