|Adapted for the Internet from:
Why God Doesn't Exist
|A Bohring atom!
|You see, my prodigal son, the
H-atom is wasteful and reckless
like you and like our beloved Earth.
Our planet not only orbits the Sun,
but also jumps back and forth from
one orbital level to the next.
|the prodigal quantum jump.
Fig. 1 Rutherford's proton
Most alpha particles run right through the foil, but some are kicked back as if they
struck a brick wall. Rutherford theorized that this could only happen if the
rebounding particles came in contact with an impenetrable region (the nucleus) of
the atom. He surmised that the atom was mostly empty space, and was later able
to estimate the diameter of the nucleus, which he dubbed the ‘proton.’ 52 Such
interpretations led the way to the planetary model of the hydrogen atom.
Fig. 2 Thomson’s plum pudding and Rutherford’s nuclear models of the atom
|Thomson rejected Rutherford’s nuclear atom arguing that the orbiting negative
electron should lose energy and spiral into the nucleus.
Fig. 3 Bohr’s quantum jump
|Bohr theorized that when the electron falls to a lower orbit, it emits energy, and
when it rises to a higher one, it gains energy. Bohr’s theory addressed Thomson’
s concerns about stability and transformed Rutherford’s nuclear atom into a
model that physicists could easily relate to. What is curious about Bohr’s
explanation is that it is diametrical to the results of the Harvard Tower Experiment
(HTE). The authors of the HTE paper argued that light leaving the Earth loses
energy to the gravitational field and gains it when approaching. Bohr’s atom does
it in reverse. Light departing an atom reduces the ‘energy’ of the atom’s ‘field’.
Fig. 4 DeBroglie’s Electron Waves
|The electron doesn’t fall towards the nucleus as Thomson predicted because it
also behaves like a wave. This electron has an integral number of waves and can
occupy only a certain region around the nucleus. This model also simultaneously
accounts for Bohr’s quantum jump and Thomson’s stability concerns.
Fig. 5 ‘The’ Quantum H atom
|The mechanics use three different physical models of the H-atom to explain their
theories and equations. De Bro-glie’s model is an inte-gral wave stretched around
a ball. Bohr’s planetary system con-sists of a single bead going around in circles
for no reason that anyone can explain. And Born’s proposal is really a region
where you are most likely to find an electron bead (i.e., a probability). The
mechanics openly admit that they have abandoned attempting to visualize what
they are talking about, yet they also claim that they have photographed atoms
and that their mathematical theory is a complete, accurate, and perfect. In science,
it works in reverse. First you must point to the physical object and name it. Then
you can explain anything you want with it. The mathematicians are effectively
amending their assumptions retroactively. Therefore, it is self-aggrandizing to
claim that Quantum is accurate and complete until the idiots of Mathematics
resolve these fundamental discrepancies. If an electron is not a discrete particle,
these models together with all of Quantum Mechanics instantly wind up in the
ash heap of history.