"Sam Wormley" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:ZoednX6YKK_fL2LMnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@giganews.com... > On 8/5/13 6:34 AM, Tom Potter wrote: >> As can be seen, the Physics Today article was just another effort by >> the Khazar Gang to claim credit for the works of others. > > Your response to the article belies your limited education, Potter. > Don't forget the role of the Pauli exclusion principle in the periodic > table and all of chemistry.
It appears that my pal Sam Wormley is fumbling around trying to distance himself from his post glorifying Bohr.
"Sam Wormley" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message news:9NCdnd5XlKTl_mDMnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@giganews.com... > Niels Bohr between physics and chemistry >> http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v66/i5/p36_s1?bypassSSO=1 > >> Bohr's atomic theory was addressed as much to chemical problems as to >> physical ones. But the great scientist's intent to establish a new >> framework for atomic and molecular chemistry was less successful, and >> was unacknowledged by most chemists. > >> Published in a series of three papers in the summer and fall of 1913, >> Niels Bohr's seminal atomic theory1 revolutionized physicists' >> conception of matter; to this day it is presented in high school and >> undergraduate-level textbooks. However, the theory is usually >> understood to pertain merely to one-electron atoms, with which it >> scored its most spectacular successes. From a historical point of >> view, that is a gross misconception, for Bohr originally thought of >> his brainchild as a much more ambitious theory that would lead to a >> new understanding of the constitution of all matter, whether the >> physicist's atoms or the chemist's molecules. After all, the very >> title of his publication, "On the constitution of atoms and >> molecules," indicates that it was addressed as much to chemists as to >> his colleagues in physics. Whereas Bohr focused on the hydrogen atom >> in the first part of his work, he devoted the second part mostly to >> more complex atoms and the third to the structure of molecules. In >> that 1913 trilogy, considerations and results of a chemical nature >> played a significant role often overlooked today. Moreover, his >> theory had important chemical consequences, in particular regarding >> the periodic arrangement of the elements.
"In 1863 there were 56 known elements with a new element being discovered at a rate of approximately one per year.
Other scientists had previously identified periodicity of elements. John Newlands described a Law of Octaves, noting their periodicity according to relative atomic weight in 1864, publishing it in 1865. His proposal identified the potential for new elements such as germanium. The concept was criticized and his innovation was not recognized by the Society of Chemists until 1887. Another person to prose a periodic table was Lothar Meyer, who published a paper in 1864 describing 28 elements classified by their valence, but with no prediction of new elements. Meyer, who is often credited with the discovery of the periodic system, opposed and criticized the Periodic Law."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Moseley "In 1913, Moseley observed and measured the X-ray spectra of various chemical elements. Moseley's law in X-ray spectra justified many concepts in chemistry by sorting the chemical elements of the periodic table of the elements in a quite logical order based on their physics."
Niels Bohr's published in a series of three papers in the summer and fall of 1913.
The fact of the matter is that the Periodic Table is arranged based on protons in nuclei, and not on electron orbits.
It is sad that many science web site authors are ignorant or have a race/religion/nationality bias.