Theory for cause of metastable state - Establishing causality in nature again -

[Wolfhart Willimczik]

!

Moderator Note

This is science, people. Check your egos at the door. Cultural concepts, personal bias and assumptions should not be part of a scientific discussion. Answering questions and supplying evidence for assertions is mandatory in this section.

 

If you have a problem with a moderator note, please use the Report Post function rather than taking the discussion off-topic.

there was no reaction of my first report...

I accept "mumbo jumbo" now as a acceptable scientific term.

And I also wait now of the answer of my question:

What is it now – nonsense or to complicated for this reader?

 

I have explained some basics of atomic metastable states, Wolfhart. This is the point where you acknowledge that, admit you were mistaken, and modify your thesis. (The point was actually several posts back, in #26, but there was this silly detour)

I told you twice you are right.

I would include your idea, but I don't want steal it. You should publish it by yourself.

[swansont]

there was no reaction of my first report...

I accept "mumbo jumbo" now as a acceptable scientific term.

And I also wait now of the answer of my question:

What is it now – nonsense or to complicated for this reader?

 

It's an answer to a nonexistent problem.

[Phi for All]

there was no reaction of my first report...

 

!

Moderator Note

Untrue. Post #44 was the reaction.

 

What is it now – nonsense or to complicated for this reader?

 

!

Moderator Note

This IS a personal attack. Please take a breath, adjust your attitude, STOP responding to modnotes and please get back on topic.

[Wolfhart Willimczik]

WW wrote:

What is it now – nonsense or to complicated for this reader?

 

Moderator Note
This IS a personal attack.

 

A “person(n)el attack” ?

He said it and I cited an official definition at
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/mumbo+jumbo
There are 2 possibilities, ergo my question which one is applicable is legitimate.

 

 

Moderators Note:

If you have a problem with a moderator note, please use the Report Post function rather than taking the discussion off-topic.

 

This is a public forum – or?
Everything is public. Admins can not take the privilege of an exception and work secretly like a secret service.
Even the police must work publicly. Everything else would be certainly against a democratic society and probably also against the constitution of the free country you live in.
Ergo: Everything you have to say you should do it openly - there in the forum.

Everybody can read everything!

If there is any rule against it, it is time to change the rule.

[John Cuthber]

WW wrote:

What is it now – nonsense or to complicated for this reader?

 

Moderator Note

This IS a personal attack.

 

A “person(n)el attack” ?

He said it and I cited an official definition at

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/mumbo+jumbo

There are 2 possibilities, ergo my question which one is applicable is legitimate.

 

 

Moderators Note:

If you have a problem with a moderator note, please use the Report Post function rather than taking the discussion off-topic.

 

This is a public forum – or?

Everything is public. Admins can not take the privilege of an exception and work secretly like a secret service.

Even the police must work publicly. Everything else would be certainly against a democratic society and probably also against the constitution of the free country you live in.

Ergo: Everything you have to say you should do it openly - there in the forum.

Everybody can read everything!

If there is any rule against it, it is time to change the rule.

Or it is time to do to a different site.

[Wolfhart Willimczik]

Or it is time to do to a different site.

yes, somewhere else, but always publicly

Now this is anyway derailed and too late.

[uncool]

The definition that's being used is nonsense; however, mumbo jumbo has a different connotation than nonsense. When "mumbo jumbo" is being used to mean nonsense, it means nonsense that's dressed up in pseudo-technical terms and made to appear overly complicated. But in short, the definition being used is the one about nonsense.

=Uncool-

[arc]

This may or may not be a time for this suggestion, this would have been a great opportunity for I and many other to learn some historic context in these matters. I would like to see if possible there could be a new category that people of a scientific back ground in teaching and/or research may post in or be moved to, so that their work maybe discussed in historic context. So the original poster's work may be appreciated for its contributions to science within the scope of its field and time and how its importance is related to current theory and practices. This would be done with the poster's consent, or if declined it can be placed on the anvil and challenged. I have an appreciation for any person who in their youth bucked the norm and did what others said could not be done.

Edited April 14, 2013 by arc

[swansont]

I would include your idea, but I don't want steal it. You should publish it by yourself.

 

Publish? This is literally textbook material that I learned in my first-year graduate QM class. From a physics standpoint, this counts as basic stuff.

[Wolfhart Willimczik]

Publish? This is literally textbook material that I learned in my first-year graduate QM class. From a physics standpoint, this counts as basic stuff.

thanks for the information

[swansont]

The flip side of this is that if you post some idea that is ignorant of or contradicts first-year QM, it's almost certainly going to be wrong.

[Wolfhart Willimczik]

swansont, on 14 Apr 2013 - 18:23, said:

The flip side of this is that if you post some idea that is ignorant of or contradicts first-year QM, it's almost certainly going to be wrong.

This is your syllogism.

There is no contradiction whatsoever.

 

To end this “muju” there is my proposal:

There is my definition again:

 

Any physical process - basically ready to start - will be halted as long as more than

one of exact equal and choose able values of a parameter for the process exist.

 

 

I have a clear definition everybody can work with.

Now show yours that everybody on this planet can make itself a comparison.

Edited April 15, 2013 by Wolfhart Willimczik

[John Cuthber]

That's anything but clear, and a contradiction in terms.

If it's ready then it isn't waiting for something to be right.

Also you have not explained who or what decides that it's "ready" nor what parameters it's waiting for.

At best you have reinvented the "hidden variables" idea.

 

But the point is that, while you ignore basic physics, your posts will not mean anything and will be written off as mumbo jumbo.

(By which I mean very obscure and not meaningful or not true).

[CaptainPanic]

!

Moderator Note

 

I am (temporarily?) closing this thread, so everybody can cool down a bit, and the moderators have the time to read all your posts and see if it should be re-opened.

 

There are far too many large-font, bold replies, and far too many discussions on who's done what, and too little about the science.

[swansont]

What is the choosable parameter in an atomic de-excitation?

[Wolfhart Willimczik]

What is the choosable parameter in an atomic de-excitation?

it is the direction in space of the photon.

I said it already - you should read my beginning posting.

[swansont]

it is the direction in space of the photon.

I said it already - you should read my beginning posting.

 

There is no photon until the de-excitation occurs. If the photon causes the transition, where did the photon come from?

 

Also, why are some states metastable and others not, if de-excitation depends on an external parameter? e.g. what external parameter makes the Hydrogen 2S state metastable, while the 2P state, with almost exactly the same energy, has a lifetime of 1.6 ns?

[John Cuthber]

I'd also like to see how this idea leads to the experimentally verified relationship between excitation energy and radiative half life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_emission#Rate_of_spontaneous_emission

[Wolfhart Willimczik]

There is no photon until the de-excitation occurs. If the photon causes the transition, where did the photon come from?

An exited electron moves to a lower level of energy by emitting a photon is basic physics.

Moving electrons generate electromagnetic waves - ergo also photons.

You may argue the photon causes the transition or the transition causes the photon…

I let it to you what you prefer: first the egg or first the hen.

 

(Why must I teach you the basics of nuclear physics?)

[John Cuthber]

An exited electron moves to a lower level of energy by emitting a photon is basic physics.

Moving electrons generate electromagnetic waves - ergo also photons.

You may argue the photon causes the transition or the transition causes the photon…

I let it to you what you prefer: first the egg or first the hen.

 

(Why must I teach you the basics of nuclear physics?)

 

That's not necessarily to do with nuclear physics, but anyway.

 

Why must we teach you basic logic?

At the time when the atom "decides" to emit a photon there in not yet a photon.

So, at that time the photon (which doesn't exist) can not have a direction in space.

So the direction can't be the " choosable parameter in an atomic de-excitation?"

Edited April 15, 2013 by John Cuthber

[Wolfhart Willimczik]

Also, why are some states metastable and others not, if de-excitation depends on an external parameter? e.g. what external parameter makes the Hydrogen 2S state metastable, while the 2P state, with almost exactly the same energy, has a lifetime of 1.6 ns?

I have not investigated H 2S. You may see on my page 20 what I what states I investigated N, Ne, and Ar – not H.

As you should know there are allow able states and not allow able states in any atom.

 

If any electron stays in a non- allow able state it was called a “metastable state”, but nobody had any explanation, why it stays such a long time in a forbidden state.

Can my student follow that far?

 

 

Why must we teach you basic logic?

The user John Cuthber is ignored do to sabotaging this forum

[John Cuthber]

 

 

The user John Cuthber is ignored do to sabotaging this forum

I rather doubt that.

You are expected to give a meaningful reply to valid questions.

You have not answered Swansont's question (which I essentially restated).

 

Nor have you answered mine about the prediction of the E^3 relation for the decay constant.

 

You can't keep sabotaging the forum and expect to get away with it.

[Phi for All]

(Why must I teach you the basics of nuclear physics?)

Why must we teach you basic logic?

The user John Cuthber is ignored do to sabotaging this forum

You can't keep sabotaging the forum and expect to get away with it.

 

!

Moderator Note

I'm asking you both to grow up and stop baiting each other. This is getting ridiculous. Stick to the science and leave the sniping for the playground.

[swansont]

(Why must I teach you the basics of nuclear physics?)

Well, this is atomic physics. Let's get that part right.

 

I have not investigated H 2S.

If you have an all-encompassing model it shouldn't matter. You should be able to explain why some states decay rapidly, as predicted, or are metastable.

 

You may see on my page 20 what I what states I investigated N, Ne, and Ar – not H.

As you should know there are allow able states and not allow able states in any atom.

 

If any electron stays in a non- allow able state it was called a “metastable state”, but nobody had any explanation, why it stays such a long time in a forbidden state.

Is that Paschen notation for the states? What is the actual state configuration — one needs to look at the angular momentum values.

Can my student follow that far?

Don't go there. Seriously. Phi has already warned about sniping and personal remarks.

[Wolfhart Willimczik]

Well, this is atomic physics. Let's get that part right.

 

 

If you have an all-encompassing model it shouldn't matter. You should be able to explain why some states decay rapidly, as predicted, or are metastable.

 

Is that Paschen notation for the states? What is the actual state configuration — one needs to look at the angular momentum values.

 

 

I was already thinking on radioactive decay. Observations indicate that my theory is right also for this, but it is right for boiling water also.

 

More rapidly means the information from the outside is coming faster in. There are many ways - for instance a higher pressure and temperature in a gas. I could measure a dependency from the pressure. You suggested an electromagnetic field. In space are the times longest, because a single atom is very alone.

 

 

 

What is "Paschen notation"?

I made my research 1966 - Mr. Paschen was obviously later - or?

You may investigate the angular momentum. My theory opens up an entire field of new research.

 

You have not yet presented your definition of metastable states that other physicist can compare it side by side.

Otherwise we get lost in details.

Edited April 15, 2013 by Wolfhart Willimczik