Re: "archaic" view of atom structure
From: Creighton Hogg (wchogg_at_hep.wisc.edu)
Date: 12/17/04
- Next message: Lewis Mammel: "Re: "archaic" view of atom structure"
- Previous message: David Evens: "Re: Relative Movement vs. Moving through Space"
- In reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: "archaic" view of atom structure"
- Next in thread: Lewis Mammel: "Re: "archaic" view of atom structure"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:17:48 -0600
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Uncle Al wrote:
> lindas4@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Earlier today, I was told that the view of an atom as a nucleus with
> > electrons in circular orbits was "archaic".
<>
> > Would a real "card carrying physicist", hopefully a physics instructor,
> > please tell me if I am missing something here?
>
> High school education.
>
> http://www.orbitals.com/orb/orbtable.htm
> http://www.shef.ac.uk/chemistry/orbitron/
> http://www.chem.purdue.edu/gchelp/aos/
> http://itl.chem.ufl.edu/ao_pict/
> http://daugerresearch.com/orbitals/
> http://www.orbitals.com/orb/orbtable.htm
>
> American zero-goal education has arrived. Every child left behind!
What I find rather odd is that I had to learn all about orbitals and
Schrodinger's equation in freshman chem in highschool.
- Next message: Lewis Mammel: "Re: "archaic" view of atom structure"
- Previous message: David Evens: "Re: Relative Movement vs. Moving through Space"
- In reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: "archaic" view of atom structure"
- Next in thread: Lewis Mammel: "Re: "archaic" view of atom structure"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]