|
| | | | |
| | | |
| Stat |
Members: 3645
Articles: 2'506'133
Articles rated: 2609
26 April 2024 |
|
| | | | |
|
Article overview
| |
|
|
A Bit too Far | | Joel M. Williams
; | | Date: |
15 Apr 1999 | | Subject: | General Physics | physics.gen-ph | | Affiliation: | JMC Williams Consultants, Los Alamos | | Abstract: | In the particle in the box problem, the particle is not in both boxes at the same time as some would have you believe. It is a set definition situation with the two boxes being part of a set that also contains a particle. Set and subset differences are explored. Atomic electron orbitals can be mimicked by roulette wheel probability; thus ELECTRONIC ROULETTE. 0 and 00 serve as boundary limits and are on opposite sides of the central core - a point that quantum physics ignores. Considering a stray marble on the floor as part of the roulette wheel menage is taking assumptions a bit too far. Likewise, the attraction between a positive and negative charge at distance does not make the negative charge part of the positive charge’s orbital system. This, of course, is contrary to the stance of current quantum physics methodology that carries this orbital association a bit too far. | | Source: | arXiv, physics/9904031 | | Services: | Forum | Review | PDF | Favorites | |
|
|
No review found.
Did you like this article?
Note: answers to reviews or questions about the article must be posted in the forum section.
Authors are not allowed to review their own article. They can use the forum section.
browser Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
News, job offers and information for researchers and scientists:
| |
REGISTER