Dovada

According to Wikipedia the definition of an orbit in physics is: "In physics, an orbit is the gravitationally curved path of an object around a point in space, for example the orbit of a planet around the center of a star system". If the point in space is constantly moving should the term spiral be used instead? I don't see this as answering the question. The main thing that is generally consistent throughout the universe is the galactic motion we have. Does this galactic motion control the uniformity of atomic structure? If a simple hydrogen atom which contains one proton and one electron moves in the same direction in the form of an atom within space, can the particles be considered particles in motion? If yes can they be considered the same as parallel currents? If yes the resultant magnetic fields will be opposing, so will the magnetic fields cause the particles to repel each other? Gravity is related to cosmic motion. The cosmic motion drives electromagnetic forces that allow neutral matter to attempt to share induced common magnetic fields.

I have never said this.

Originally the atomic model was considered stationary and In classical mechanics, electrons would rapidly travel towards and collide with the nucleus, making stable atoms impossible. Hence the quantum model was proposed to overcome this problem. Electrons could then only orbit in discreet quanta states expressed by the number n=1,2,3 etc But we now know that atoms, in cosmic motion traveling at hundreds of thousands of meters per second, composed of charged negative electrons and positive protons thus traveling in the same direction will generate magnetic fields that are out of phase and will subsequently repel each other, thus solving the phenomenon. The quantum atomic model does not explain why the atom experiences cosmic motion or indeed gravitational acceleration which comes under the same banner. The quantum atomic still lacks this interface ability.

No - On the contrary it is the underlying quantum effect that needs to be understood better. The base electromagnetic energy condition within the atom is set up by the cosmic motion environment, and needs to be overcome before the atomic particle (the electron) can change its energy state (orbit level). Once this changed energy state occurs, the atom within the current environment can no-longer maintain that changed energy state, so the energy is returned to the environment in the form of emitting what is currently referred to as a photon of energy. If energy is fed to the atom at a rate or level which is slower and below this cosmic motion energy state, then the atom can absorb the energy by changing its internal wavelength structures (for example Bohr radius) and subsequent cosmic velocity. It is in this manner that gravitational fields maintain cosmic motion of atomic matter in the form of moving planets, moons and stars etc. It is important to understand that the energy rest state of atomic particles is not rest, but simply the correct level for the cosmic velocity condition. When in the laboratory we poke and prod or play particle snooker we disturb this rest cosmic velocity condition and notice both the particle and environment start to react as they try to re-establish that original rest condition. Basically the photon approach to getting a reaction from the atom is a heavy handed overload condition, a little like firing a bullet into the atom. Sure you will get a reaction but don't assume its the only way to get a response from the atom. Gently does it.

ajb - You seem to fail to understand me. The quantum atomic model has proved strikingly successful but it does not interface into classic electric theory properly. It is going to happen in the future that the quantum atomic model must evolve to overcome its present limitations. 1. It does not have the capacity to interface into the principles governing gravitation or explain the cosmic motion of atomic structure. 2. It does not explain what happens to the atom when it receives energy levels that are below or in-between the quanta level condition. I realize you seem to disagree here: But these observations only define the spectrum in the area of electromagnetic radiation. The area below or in-between the quanta levels contribute to cosmic motion under the banner of gravitational acceleration. We do after all move for a reason. The quantum atomic model needs to be developed further to enable it to interface and satisfy as yet much of the unsolved phenomena. The purpose here is to stimulate new concepts and ideas that are worthy of discussion.

They say crying is good for you. You will cry in the future as the physicists realize what they have overlooked. In the past, our accepted quantum theory, which is primarily founded on the phenomena of particle wave duality, has created a lot of disagreement and frustration within the scientific community. Many scientists, including Einstein did not want to accept quantum theory and actively sought a more down to earth realistic explanation. The reality that just a single positive integer number (n) i.e. n=1 or n=2 could mathematically solve this prediction that an electron should release electromagnetic radiation was unrealistic, but in the absence of more detailed cosmic motion data or other concepts being available at the time, there was no other solution that could work. Over the century this single positive integer number (n) i.e. n=1 or n=2 system became entrenched in the atomic model becoming an unshakable burden that irritated many physicists including Albert Einstein when he said “Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing” and again when he said “The more success the quantum theory has, the sillier it looks”. Confusion usually starts somewhere. We need to agree on something before we attempt to communicate. The SI system is the world's most widely used system of measurement, which is used both in everyday commerce and in science. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units I have news for you and its all bad - Your clocks are moving - Not only on the surface of a spinning earth but a planet that spirals around a sun that is also spiraling around a moving galaxy. You believe our motion through the cosmos is basically ignorable within your quantum atomic model. Isn't this a bit one eyed? Really ask the questions, why are we in cosmic motion? How does the atom cope with cosmic motion? Using principles based on classic electrical theory should charged particles contained in atomic structure respond to this motion by forming electric current flow, and if this is the case it should be accounted for in our atomic model?

Is the SI system also arbitrary? No it is a world accepted standard. Without a world accepted standard of communication we would be babbling. Everything in the local group of galaxies conforms to many of the same common velocity conditions. The formation of suns and solar systems everywhere deal with many identical cosmic energy structures, so why shouldn't they share in having common internal atomic structures. Do not assume that everywhere within the cosmos is identical to what we notice around our planet as this is speculatively naive. Name a good clock.. I heard atomic clocks find their time keeping varies with velocity! You where looking in the wrong place. Anyway answer the question if you can "What actually causes the rotation of the earth?". This is no where near to the amount of numerology in what I present to that being used in modern day physics by mathematicians. Where did N=1 or N=2 or N=3 when referring to electron orbits in the quantum atomic model come from? (Numerology?) The physics mathematicians looked for patterns in the physical structure of the atom and worked from there. All I have done is extended that same principle to include conditions outside in the atoms environment, based on one law. “If you cannot take the atom out of the universe, then you cannot take the universe out of the atom!” I do not want anything more than to draw your attention to the limited viewpoints associated with quantum theory and its poor interfacing with classical theory, such that there is most likely an alternative solution. The planets and suns in-fact the whole galaxy and its local group of galaxies is moving in a uniform direction, ask yourself why? and how can this be happening? The energy and power needed to move every atom in the galaxy is immense, much greater than the power contained in the galaxies atomic structure. From this perspective I made the assumption that conditions found within the cosmic environment most likely control many of the atomic functions. The quantum atomic model reminds me of a computer without an interface into the outside world. No interface means it can only talk to itself and to the people who speculatively created it.

My apologies swansont, I did not mean to break any of the forum rules.

One of the major influences on our earths atomic structure is the sun. It has a surface gravitational acceleration of 274 meters per second per second. If you could stand near the surface of the sun and start to fall toward the sun you would cover the distance of 137 meters in the first second or cover the SI value of 1 meter in 1/137 seconds. Is this just another coincidence. Atomic activity on our planet has always been very sensitive to electromagnetic changes that occur within the cosmos. If the sun develops a hiccup (say a solar flare) then the atoms of the earth also hiccup. Fundamentally this is telling us that what happens within the cosmic environment also happens within our planet’s atomic structure. If the earth spin is slowing down then what is causing this slowing down? (the sun?). And you say the period of time in a day is changing, then time and velocity are both changing, so which of these two platforms is your stable reference point. You would have to be looking for it first! What actually causes the rotation of the earth? where: radius earth = 6,378,100 meters wavelength of hydrogen = 0.21106 meters Earth's spin = square-root((0.21106/(2*pi)) * 6,378,100) = 462.87 meters/sec This indicates that the atom knows whats going on in the world and as usual it processes the energy needed at the only practical resonant value it can. Do not say I am using the value of 0.21106 out of context because the earth made of atoms has a colossal cosmic velocity with the earths slow spin condition superimposed on it.

For the benefit of astronomers and physicists from countries like the USA and the UK that can or do often refer to cosmic motions, using the older imperial measurement system, instead of the newer SI decimal system need to note that: The use of miles per second when referring to orbit or spin velocities of the planet earth and other galactic motions relating to the motion of the solar system, seriously masks out the possibility of relationships occurring with other areas of physics like atomic structure behaviour.

I agree in that this is a purely electromagnetic phenomenon. If the loop is conductive the motion of the magnet will have some of its energy imparted to the ring and a back EMF from the ring will be subsequently imposed on the magnet. This depends only on the acceleration force you impart to the magnet and has nothing really to do with the earths gravitational field.

Yes there is a direct relationship, but science has not officially discovered it yet. For example like particles like electrons, normally repel each other due to their electrical charge being identical polarity. When you move these electrons their electrical charge effectively then becomes an electric current. The magnetic phase properties produced by the electric current flow is in-phase due to a common motive direction and the normally repulsive electrons then become electromagnetically attracted together. This is the same condition as described under parallel conductors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amp%C3%A8re%27s_force_law It is necessary to understand that all atomic structure is permanently in motion within the cosmos, a condition which can satisfy the Ampère's force law and because of this atomic matter can and does experience an electromagnetic attractive force. We normally refer to this as the gravitational effect.

Just to help clarify and from a realistic point of view the quantum atomic model with its charged particles have to constantly and continually include the following set of cosmic motions. Sidereal Rotation of the earth some 465 meters per second at the equator, Earth mean solar orbit velocity 29,770 meters per second, Our galaxy has a spin motion of 225,000 meters per second, Our galactic motion through to cosmos 600,000 meters per second. Additional to these spiraling motions, the galaxy also constantly presents the following U-V-W motions to the atoms of our solar system. U is the inward 9,000 meters per second motion of the sun and our solar system toward the galactic center, V is the 12,000 meters per second sun’s motion relative to other local stars around us, and, W is the 7,000 meters per second galactic plane vertical motion of our sun and its solar system. Most physical constants can be defined by these values and in many ways these cosmic motions are defining the length width and depth of a single cosmic second for the atoms of the planet earth. The world needs a new breed of physicist in the 21st century who has the clarity of mind to develop and interface our atomic model into functioning with the cosmic universe using classical electrical theory.

The theory is a hundred years old and a lot more cosmic knowledge has come to our attention using infra red technology since then. We need to remember that atoms on the earth cover the S.I. distance of 1 meter in less than 1/600,000 seconds. It is for this reason an atom can change its internal electrical resonance to suit its environment. Meaning by changing the velocity of the atom, it can change its internal wavelength structures to suit its current environment, this also suggests its possible to change the Bohr radius. The stability of the cosmic velocities ensure we have a reasonably stable atomic structure. For this reason atoms share the same characteristics everywhere. May I answer you on this point: I repeat some of same the cosmic numbers again. In addition to the previous statements the following empirical constant Big G can be calculated using the following two galactic values of 600,000 meters per second and the U velocity 9,000 meters per second. Gravitational constant (big G) = (4.9015 / galactic velocity)^2 Big G = ((9,000/ (1836.151))/600,000)^2 = 6.673x10-11 The mathematical relationships between atomic structure, the empirical constants and the cosmic motion environment is outstanding, which can only be leading us to one inevitable conclusion; they are interacting under one single universal energy structure.

Every atom is subject to incredible external forces which it has to continually conform to using classical electrical theory: The Bohr radius 5.291x10-11 meters may be calculated simply by using the following cosmic values: Where: Mean solar orbit velocity = 29,770 meters/sec Galactic U velocity = 9,000 meters/sec Galactic velocity = 600,000 meters/sec Earth solar frequency = 1/499.0119 = 0.00200396 Hz = (c / radius distance sun-earth) Bohr radius = ((√ 9,000) + 29,770) * 0.00200396 / (Pi * 600,000^2) = 5.2917x10-11 meters Is the cosmos mimicking the atom or is the atom mimicking the cosmic conditions? From this type of information it should be possible to predict some very interesting effects. The object of presenting this information is to create an interest by other intelligent beings in looking at things in a different way, by including the atoms environment into the atomic model.

Why do we have to use constants in our atomic theory? Consider this fact from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb%27s_law Coulomb’s law is fully accurate only when the objects are stationary, and remains approximately correct only for slow movement. These conditions are collectively known as the electrostatic approximation. When movement takes place, magnetic fields that alter the force on the two objects are produced. From where I am sitting I see atomic charged particle contained with the earths atoms traveling at some 600,000 m/s which is c/500 times slower than the speed of light. Atomic charged particles moving through the environment of space at this speed produce powerful magnetic fields. Powerful enough to seriously modify atomic behavior. How does the accepted atomic model cope with this condition? It needs to be modified by the use of physical constants. Try to imagine for a moment a scientist travelling always facing backwards whilst travelling into the future, always looking where he has been and not looking directly where he is going. As he travels backwards new information is appearing to him on either side, which does not fit the already accepted assumptions or scientific models he has already entrenched into law. He then franticly speculates wildly, modifies these assumptions by saying if I add this number to the mathematical equation I can keep the precious scientific model I have and save face. This question needs to be answered first "Why are we moving within the cosmos?" If we are to make any real headway in our scientific conquests.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon If the photon contains no mass, then only the inertia of its frequency component can impart a reaction on an electron or similar particle. For this reaction to have any effect it has to have electrical wave characteristics in its oscillatory structure to impose a electrical excitation of another charged particle. I do not believe in magic.

Could ħ also be defined from external environmental conditions like: Planck’s h-bar = (electron volt x (29,770/464.463))^2 = 1.054x10-34 Plank’s constant = (electron volt x (29,770/464.463))^2 x 2Pi = 6.626x10-34 Where: electron volt is 1.602x10-19 solar orbital velocity = 29,770 in m/s and earths equatorial spin = 464.463 in m/s I have looked at a lot of strange coincidences in the past. It seems that the continual motion imposed on atomic charge particles is not considered in quantum mechanics.

Hi swansont I am not sure of your use of z and m - is z referring to impedance and m mass. My concern is regarding the nature of the Bohr radius (its cause). I have spent many years trying to discover the reason for its existence. You are right "The Bohr radius is a constant, and the mathematics for its existence depends on use of other constants". This in my mind says that something is causing the constant called the Bohr radius, plus the fact that it is calculated using other constants expresses a concern that we really don't understand what is really behind what is controlling atomic behavior. The fact all atoms share the same radius characteristic tends to indicate that the cause behind the Bohr radius is external to and common to all atoms. For this reason I wanted to find out if anybody knew of what can vary the Bohr radius. Logic says a physics forum is where the most educated minds in this area can be found so hence the question has been asked. Surely others have asked themselves the same type of questions.

Not sure if the answer I seek can be derived from these methods, but as you suggested I will (read the article again). Thank you.

I do not understand how that article helps. Would you point the relevant areas in the article that apply?

I am sorry I did not clarify what I meant to say. Excitation of an electron is not what I was referring to. I realize that adding energy in the form of a photon strike causes the electron to change orbital state. This excited is considered somewhat unstable. What I really meant to ask is, can for example the Bohr radius be changed to say a percentage of the original value. i.e. 78% or 132% and be maintained. If this is possible, how could it be achieved?

Is it possible to cause a change the the value for the Bohr radius? What needs to be done to effect a change if it's possible to be changed?

Which field are we talking about: A field can be either a classical field or a quantum field, depending on whether it is characterized by numbers or quantum operators respectively. Are we mixing classical theory with quantum theory? Action at a distance may be described either way. From the quantum point of view it occurs using the photon theory. This discussion suggests we are a little off track for this thread, I feel the confusion exists because the two different theories do not mix properly.

What are they then?