| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Sergey Karavashkin" |
| Date: |
24 Jan 2005 10:14:15 AM |
| Object: |
To Androcles about MMX |
From:Franz Heymann (notfranz.heymann@btopenworld.com)
Subject:Re: To Androcles about MMX
Newsgroups:sci.physics
Date:2005-01-15 07:20:12 PST
"Sergey Karavashkin" <selftrans@yandex.ru> wrote in message
news:a42650fc.0501141422.5a3fd8d4@posting.google.com...
[snip]
As I see, Dirk, you vaste time. I told you then, the problem with
curl(grad) is, our theorem was confined by transverse waves.
Franz Heymann wrote:
You are a confirmed idiot if you still believe that curl grad ( ) can
ever be anything other than zero.
Franz
Sergey:
You, Franz, cannot find more idiot than you are. Physics goes ahead,
while you in all our amount of dozens of perfectly working results
clutched at one intermediate which you are unable even to grasp, not
to elaborate. But this has been already done and soon will be
published. Well, you remain in the same puddle in which you were
wallowing before. You do so all these years. You are void and
fruitless. This is not an opinion, this is a diagnosis.
Sergey
.
|
|
| User: "None" |
|
| Title: Re: To Androcles about MMX |
09 Feb 2005 10:36:44 AM |
|
|
Well, Franz, how many times now. How pleased you were to call me and
other colleagues dirty words, to claim ignorant all who disagree with
an absurd of your rotten conceptions, when you have arranged with your
party to break the discussions, terrorised me and my party. But once it
is the matter of principle and your responsibility, you again have flew
away. It is usual for you. It shows the truth about all apologists of
the silliness you defend. To tell directly, you are most awful
terrorists. You corrode from inside the system of scientific values,
scientific honesty, of proof in science, making an appearance of very
important and intellectual peacocks. Your perverted understanding of
other colleagues' posts, your haughtiness, your neglect of proof
demonstrate, your interest is not physics, not the nature of phenomena,
not truth. Your interest is only a manger of your clan, and for this
sake you trample other colleagues. You and Dirk vd Moortel have been
sent to this thread to terrorise Androcles and me and to prevent us
from constructive discussion. And at the same time you managed me (and
not only me) a steeple-chase with posting, lest I be able to respond
normally to your meanness. And this is not for the first time. Some
time ago you assured me that you have no concern to my difficulties
with entering Google after your fail in discussion. But the scheme has
repeated. Again your failure and at the same time my difficulties with
posting. And you think it good behaviour... Well, where is now your
peacock's tail? ;-) Google's scissors rust without work. ;-)
Sergey
Here is that post on thread " For Bill Hobba on QED " to which you
never replied:
Franz, you do not cope with your task. ;-) What for are you paid on the
Earth? ;-) I already have answered this question on 2004-12-18 to
Aleksandr Timofeev on his thread " The end of Bohr's complementarity
principle? " and this question long time is terra incognito only for
those who wants to know nothing except Planck formula. Do you think, if
you took a third position, you at once became a ballet-dancer? ;-)
1.In accordance with Bohr's treatment, for a classical oscillator with
the energy
E = (p^2/2m) + U (1)
where p is the pulse of electron,
the integral of action is
I= (integral over a close loop) p*dx (2)
"Hence we yield the following significant expression for classical
frequency:
v = dE/dI (3)
where v is the oscillation frequency of oscillator, E is the energy of
oscillator, and I is the integral of action".
Thus, "Both by classical and quantum theory, the frequency can be
calculated as the ratio of energy increment to the action increment"
[E.V. Shpolsky. Atomic physics, p. 361 (Russian)].
Relation between the Planck constant and integral of action you will
find yourself.
2.As to Planck constant, go to page 45
http://selftrans.narod.ru/v3_1/hubble/hubble45/hubble45.html
of our paper "On the nature of red shift of Metagalaxy". There in Fig.
10 you will find a standard curve for fluorescence with respect to the
wavelength of exciting light. Red dotted line denotes, which would be
the regularity, should the Planck constant were strongly constant.
Presence of fluorescence beyond the critical wavelength, as well as
smoothed maximum, unambiguously show Planck constant to be not a
strongly constant number. This is a statistical value, and when you
state the energy to be strongly batched, you simply show your
ignorance and disability to connect facts even in a simplest way. You
even don't know what is it statistics and that Planck equation for
black body radiation "in fact results from the interpolation between
Rayleigh - Jeans and Wien formulas" [Shpolsky, p. 287]. And nothing
more. And from this all legs grow for Planck constant as the statistic
value.
3. As to imaginary discreteness of solutions suggested by Schroedinger
equation, read classical authors of QM - for example, Fermi. In his
lectures, when having presented this equation, he claims: "Periodicity
condition requires function u to have a shape
u ~ exp (i*(2*(pi)*l*x/a)) (4)
where l takes any integer numbers (positive, negative and zero)" [E.
Fermi. Notes on quantum mechanics. Lecture 3]
This is a stipulation of classical wave mechanics built on determinacy
of processes and on resonance pattern of oscillations of oscillator. QM
recognises neither determinacy nor resonance pattern. So only after you
and your militant ignorant adherents match the periodicity principle in
absence of electron's trajectory with your absurd groundless Heisenberg
uncertainty, you may use this condition of discreteness to add
Schroedinger equation a discrete appearance, as well as may state the
energy being strongly quantified. Without this, Schroedinger equation
does not describe discrete energies, dolt.
Thus as I see, you are absolutely sure that your childish helpless
questions have driven me to a deadlock? Poor kiddie, take your finger
out of the ink-pot and wipe your snivel.
Sergey
Sorry, Franz, I thought you went away, but you also deleted all your
posts! And DIrk too! Well, you went away, deleted posts, but the
problem remained. What about problem? ;-)
Sergey
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
