Re: "The Fibonacci Spiral Sequence Found In The Smart Model Line Spectra"

From: Landle (landlematt_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 01/20/05 

Date: 19 Jan 2005 17:20:33 -0800

Smart,

Your site has many details.. except the introduction... it's like
explaining stem cells without explaining what are the nucleutides
and the double helix. This is why people can't get what you are
conveying.

First things first.

1. Pls. explain the spiral helix. Thomson also used this in his
rotating
magnetic field unit. Where did you guys get the idea from. I heard
EL once mentioned about double torus. It's not bad to share where you
get the initial idea from. The rest is yours of course and no one
would steal it.

2. How the heck did you thought up of matter and anti-matter both
in your necleus as well as neutrino and electron/positron? Why make
it complex by creating the concept of force field to separate them?

3. Is there electron in your model? Or is photon solidying become
your "electron"?

4. You have Aether in your model. What is the function of Aether
in your atomic model? Does it contribute to the formation of the
strong force/weak force, etc. for example? I just want to compare your
concept to Thomson. In his model, the Aether is directly responsible
for the 4 forces.

4. In the Bohr atom. Spectra is produced by the difference between
two or more energy levels. In your model since you don't have
energy levels around the nucleus but only nucleus, can you give
a clear brief explanation of how your nucleus itself can produce the
spectra outputs without electron energy levels??

That's enough for now. Of all Aether models, yours is the most
vague because you omit a good intro so people who visited your site
just end up being turned off because they don't know what
the heck made you present the way you present them.

Well. The real Aether model may be totally different than what you
guys (Thomson, Seto, S. Enterprize) are presenting. But it's good
to start somewhere. Everything start with a step.

Landle

S. Enterprize Company wrote:
> >You must admit I took you seriously when I posted my links to actual
> >measurements of orbitals. Also if you have read my other
> >"informational" posts, I have taken the various authors seriously,
and
> >written (my possibly flawed, and nobody's perfect) explanations for
> >them.
> >
> >However, when I went and followed your links, and read a little of
> >your model, I came to the opinion that you must be completely insane
> >if you think your model has anything to do with reality, or could be
> >any use to anybody.
>
> You seem to think there is no particle smaller than a sub-particle.
The Smart
> Model Theory shows that sub-sub-particles exist to account for a
field
> compression area distribution around particles.
>
> >
> >The (very selective) external links you posted on Jan 17 have
nothing
> >to do with what you are claiming.
>
> Yes it does. QM claims oxygen is an electron orbital sphere. The
Smart Model
> Theory predicted this was incorrect years ago. Then you were shown
real atomic
> images of PdO. You can visually observe the attached oxygen rings
next to Pd.
>
> >
> >Your own fits to spectra don't fit.
>
> Yes they do fit. A comparison of real experimental data is shown
incomparison
> to the Smart Model Theory and they both match.
>
> >
> >Your verification of the Zeeman effect is simply nonsense.
>
>
> This is incorrect too. As more energy is added to or taken away
from an atom,
> it can be seen that the lower level spikes become larger. In other
words,
>
> |
> | |
> | | |
> | | | | |||||
>
> The divergence areas which approach the ultraviolet and infrared
range can
> have an increase of energy levels which bring them out more. In fact,
The Smart
> Model Theory handles the problem that QM and The Standard Model have
about
> Ultraviolet divergence.
>
> >
> >And where is your modelling of the orbitals measured by Zuo? I hope
>
> There are no electron orbitals. If there were, x-rays would be
detected when
> they ran into each other.
>
> >you are working on this. Write back when you have it.
> >
> >BR
>
>
> Smart's Alt. Physics News Group
> http://pub39.bravenet.com/forum/show.php?usernum=3320272813&cpv=1
> S. Enterprize (Science Journal)
> http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is it our math letting us down?
    ... the HUP comes into clear focus. ... electron is a cloud created from a string of mass moving over a certain ... The spheron model explains the Aether ... Aether units associated with the electrons wrap around the nucleus like ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Electron energy levels force field
    ... > About a hundred years ago when the Rutherbord atom was ... People couldn't figure out how the electron ... > energy and eventually fall into the nucleus. ... > suggested there might be something like energy levels. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Bohrs Atom still number one
    ... fall into the nucleus very quickly. ... Absent that acceleration it would travel in a straight line. ... I'm saying is if the electron is emitting radiation (photons) ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Bohrs Atom still number one
    ... they fall into the nucleus very quickly. ... Absent that acceleration it would travel in a straight line. ... I'm saying is if the electron is emitting radiation ... NOT 'orbit' the nucleus because to follow an orbit would require that the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: OOPS! Re: Part 2 Re: Ken, need help with this
    ... > results in the electron jumping outward a ring in the atom's shell. ... >> When a photon is absorbed by an atomic antenna that consists of a nucleus ... >> As a result a common misconception results that the electron is absorbing ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)