Re: Repulsion binds atoms

Ken S. Tucker wrote:

Edward Green wrote:

I have some funny ideas about "force", BTW, though I'm not trying to
develop them here.

Ok, so did AE.

Heh. Not _that_ funny idea. A different one.

I grew up in ontario, where the corruption
is so bad the professionals left in droves
for the USA that was called the "brain drain"
and now ontario has an effective IQ of 90-80.
That's likely irreversible, rather like many
flourishing societies like ancient Egypt
adopted a retarded culture, and entered
a corrupt dark age, from which they have yet
to recover. A "fake democracy" that canada
has is not sustainable, but canadians
themselves - vetted of their intelligence - are
educated to that institution and unable to
hold the governments accountable, hence
the government becomes self-serving.
That's simple Byzantium Social Dynamics.

At the risk of sounding sophmorically trite, that's deep. Your views
sound something like Ken Muldrew's, another Canadian wont to sometimes
publish here, and also an outlier in the "90-80" IQ theory -- though I
don't know if he's from Ontario.

From an American's point of view, although I've heard parts of your
country have a distinctly anglophobe outlook, I have not heard any of
the self-righteous anti-Americanism which sometimes emanates from other
corners of the world, so, without any strong evidence one way or the
other, I think of your native land as a Pretty Good Place. Maybe it's
that old British Commonwealth comraderie... excluding, of course, above
referenced francophiles.

Actually, I'm embarassed at my own "that's deep" comment, which perhaps
indicates a kind of internal brain drain to the referenced IQ level
(always believing, however, that the most vocal critics in reality are
providing evidence that they have already sunk lower), but that's about
what I have to say: I recognize deep social thought when I see it, but
have little to add. I am reminded however of a comment of a friend in
days when we thought it was much more important to fervently discuss
social issues over intoxicants, typically tending towards analyses of
the collapse of western civilization: there must have been guys like us
sitting around sharing similar thoughts in the late days of the Roman
Empire. And what good did it do them?

Irony or pop-sci paradox of the day: What good it might have done them
is if they fled the country. And where would a late Roman man of means
flee, anticipating the barbarians about to overrun his city? Possibly
Constantinople, especially if he could have known that this part of the
empire would not fall for another 1000 years. And yet, the irony is he
would hardly have escaped self-serving government corruption and palace
politics; indeed the old place name gives us the label.

But then you would want to ask about
"Electron Beam Lithography" or "Electron
Microscopes". I haven't found evidence
a pair of free electrons will radiate,

I don't follow you. Are you saying there is no radiation in these
devices associated with the spreading of the electron beams?

Yes, the radiation is nil, justas the radiation
of a current path in Super Conductor is nil.

At the risk of being obtusely persistent, shall I take it, at least for
the first two examples, that the beam spreads just about as would be
predicted for a given flux density of classical electrons travelling in
parallel, or is there some quantum effect which forbids this? Am I
really wrong in thinking a pair of similar classical charges, free to
move apart from one another would radiate?

I thought of a crude argument why this might be correct: imagine a
spherical shell of charge, held at a fixed radius until time t_0, then
released to expand. To the best of my knowledge Gauss's law applies in
dynamic as well as static situations. Combining this with the
spherical symmetry, we conclude that the electric field outside the
expanding shell never changes in advance of the shell. What about the
magnetic field? We do have a blip of dE/dt as the shell passes, so I
suppose we also have a blip of H (a singular blip at that). But that's
it. No radiation.

But the two point-like charges lack this full spherical symmetry, and
I'm still not sure what happens qualitatively. Do we get a
cylindrically symmetrical disturbance whose distant field strength
falls faster than 1/r?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Repulsion binds atoms
    ... "Electron Beam Lithography" or "Electron ... Yes, the radiation is nil, justas the radiation ... really wrong in thinking a pair of similar classical charges, ... expanding shell never changes in advance of the shell. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: The electron shell model is in challenge
    ... >> bring it here specifically dont send me to libraries ... > It covers spectra, multipole moments, transition amplitudes, bond length ... a building as well as an atom of an electron ... yet there is no radiation without *resonance*! ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: The electron shell model is in challenge
    ... >> bring it here specifically dont send me to libraries ... > It covers spectra, multipole moments, transition amplitudes, bond length ... a building as well as an atom of an electron ... yet there is no radiation without *resonance*! ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Dipoles in X-Ray Scattering
    ... If someone asks me for the name of a textbook, ... > get any magnetic field, and hence no power flow, no radiation, but ... > tone and a high freqency tone, ... In the case of an electron acted ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Cosmic acceleration rediscovered
    ... the electron imedance noise gives a signature that is ... > emitted are based in the aether. ... >> from each shell is independent of R. ... Ned's graph is correct for tired light. ...
    (sci.astro)
Loading