Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Spectral lines match up with Lenz's law #1735 Atom Totality 5th ed
Replies: 0  

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List  
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com

Posts: 9,272
Registered: 3/31/08
Spectral lines match up with Lenz's law #1735 Atom Totality 5th ed
Posted: Aug 25, 2013 1:20 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Alright, when Bohr did his Bohr Atom in 1913, all he basically did was say the spectral lines come in units of the Natural Numbers of 1 then 2 then 3 then 4 etc etc. He called this Quantum Mechanics and said it was a principle of this new science. Trouble with that, is that physics and science needs MECHANISMS, not principles to run the world.

Since Bohr, physics is just a giggle gaggle of a list of Principles with mechanisms that runs the world.

But Bohr, if he had wanted to do real Physics, not just a list collection of principles and rules, really had not to look very far, for the last time that Physics had MECHANISMS that runs the world was back in 1862 when Maxwell gave the 4 Maxwell Equations. You see, the physicists of the 20th century were not really very bright and smart physicists but rather were 2nd class physicists because they dismissed the Maxwell Equations and invented their own brand new physics that lists a long list of principles.

So if Bohr had be bright, he would have enlisted the Maxwell Equations and seen that Lenz's law matches the Coulomb law in force strength.

So that all Bohr had to do to give the Mechanism of why the electron does not spiral into the proton in hydrogen, is realize that whenever you have a Atom Nucleus with electrons in orbit around the Nucleus, you have the Coulomb Law offset by the Lenz's law. So that all Bohr actually did was say the electron behaves as 1 Planck Constant then 2 Planck Constant then 3 Planck Constant,...

Now for logical person, a logical scientist, Bohr did not do very much did he? He left us with no mechanism, only with a "trust me, the electron goes around the proton in units of Planck constant, but no mechanism as to how or why it does so". Now what Bohr gave is excellent for rumdummy physicists who really never expect much in their physics understanding, who never even expect a mechanism of what is working and how it works. Bohr and these rumdummies were simply happy and gleeful that they made lists of tens, even hundreds of Principles of Quantum Mechanics, such as the pitiful and pathetic quantum tunneling or the Double Slit, or the superconductivity or the superfluidity or the Uncertainty Principle.

But a true physicists is not happy or satisfied with lists of principles that never have mechanisms. A true physicist needs to have Mechanisms, not words. A mechanism is a whole experiment itself such as the bar magnet thrust through a closed loop wire creates a electric current. That is a mechanism and in that thrusting, Lenz's law is a force that opposes the thrusting.

That is what the Atomic theory needed, a mechanism, not a giggle gaggle list of words of principles. Instead of verifying that the spectral lines are 1 then 2 then 3 then 4 Planck constants, what Bohr really needed to do was show that Lenz's law is the formula for spectral lines.

--- quoting from H&R ---
On page 775 of Halliday & Resnick, PHYSICS, Part 2, Extended Version, 1986

F = iL x B

Because F_2 and F_3 are equal and opposite, they cancel each other; F_1, which is the force that opposes our effort to move the loop, is given in magnitude from Eqs. 35-4 and 35-5 as

F_1 = iLxB sin 90 = B^2L^2v/R

The agent that pulls the loop must do work at the steady rate of

P = F_1v = B^2L^2v^2/R

--- end quote ---

Then on page 1114 of this same textbook is given the Balmer Rydberg formula

hv_nm = (- hcR/n^2) - (-hcR/m^2)

So if one inverts the Lenz's law, one ends up with the Balmer Rydberg formula.


Yesterday in sci.physics, I wrote:

ground state measure ratio of Lenz's Law versus Coulomb Law to have the Bohr Atom #1734 Atom Totality 5th ed

What I am doing is what Bohr should have done in 1913, rather than dismiss the Maxwell Equations and invent a brand new physics of Quantum Mechanics which has no mechanisms and which is thus just a gaggle collection of principles.

The proper work that Bohr should have done was embrace the Maxwell Equations for it is full of Mechanisms and see how to derive the ground state hydrogen atom of its electron versus proton. Why the electron does not fall or spiral into the proton is due to Lenz's law, not some ghostly principle of QM.

So here we need mathematics of Lenz's Law and how it halts the Coulomb Law when the electron gets to a special specific distance from the proton in hydrogen.

So we review Lenz's law for magnitude of force. And it is equal to the Coulomb law, only opposite in direction. So the Coulomb wants to attract, but the Lenz's law keeps the electron at a distance.


--- quoting from H&R ---
On page 775 of Halliday & Resnick, PHYSICS, Part 2, Extended Version, 1986

F = iL x B

Because F_2 and F_3 are equal and opposite, they cancel each other; F_1, which is the force that opposes our effort to move the loop, is given in magnitude from Eqs. 35-4 and 35-5 as

F_1 = iLxB sin 90 = B^2L^2v/R

The agent that pulls the loop must do work at the steady rate of

P = F_1v = B^2L^2v^2/R

--- end quote ---

Alright, good so far, and now to check upon spectral lines of ground state hydrogen.

I do not know what the intense hatred of the Maxwell Equations by physicists for the time period of 1913 to 2013 was. My best guess is that the Maxwell Equations are too difficult for most every physicist to master and that only Maxwell himself mastered them and that if Maxwell had lived into 1930, we would not have Quantum Mechanics but rather-- Maxwell Equations axioms over all of Physics.

Archimedes Plutonium ?http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium ?whole entire Universe is just one big atom ?where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.