Science > Physics > Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!!
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Y.Porat" |
| Date: |
17 Feb 2005 07:09:32 AM |
| Object: |
Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
i am looking hard for the experimental evidence
for the shell (in a heavy nuc.
that has 32 electrons
the question is to the greatest institutes of technology.
and anyone who realy knows (not just hand wavers.)
my deep sucpicion is that that is just a fairy tale.
if you what to start to understand my sucpicion
just have a look at my little site:
http://www.geocities.com/porat_y/mypage.html
if you start to understand it you will start to understand
why no one ever realy found it (experimantaly
and ....
why no one will *ever * found it .
anyway
TIA for some effort
Y.Porat
ps this is not a thread for the known old parrots ...
that will pop up automatically....like automatic poppets
---------------------------
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
17 Feb 2005 09:20:15 AM |
|
|
"Y.Porat" wrote:
i am looking hard for the experimental evidence
for the shell (in a heavy nuc.
that has 32 electrons
[snip crap]
Idiot. CRC Handbook. Get a Project Head Start ***** to read it to
you.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
18 Feb 2005 02:10:46 AM |
|
|
here goes the automatic popet crook!!
you are a dam lier and old imbecil
there in no answer there to my specific question
so just ***** of this thread - lier and profesional obfuscator
it is for knopwlagable decent people not for parrot handwavers
Y.Porat
--------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Schutkeker" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
18 Feb 2005 03:35:59 PM |
|
|
You need to hook up with Archimedes Plutonium. He can help answer your
questions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 04:38:51 AM |
|
|
"John Schutkeker" <jschutkeker@sbcglobal.net.nospam> wrote in message
news:Xns9601A8E26F112lkajehoriuasldfjknak@151.164.30.48...
You need to hook up with Archimedes Plutonium. He can help answer
your
questions.
If you had not removed the headers and the context, we might have
known whom you are addressing why about what.
--
Franz
"As we grow older we understand more and more and we do less and less"
Puppi
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 06:19:13 AM |
|
|
Hyman
lets have a piece of meat even a tiny bit
and prove everybody i am supid just hand waving is no prove
untill now you 'did less and less'
wich gives a tiny BIT OF sucpicion that YOU CANT DO IT
AND HIDE BEHIND DEMAGOGISM.
or else i do not believe you !!!
and as you should know - i was not born just yesterday into physics .
----------------------
TIA
Y.Porat
----------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 01:27:04 AM |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <maporat@012.net.il> wrote in message
news:1108815553.012639.121180@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Hyman
lets have a piece of meat even a tiny bit
and prove everybody i am supid
That would not be necessary. Your stupidity shines like a searchlight
[snip]
--
Franz
"A first-rate laboratory is one in which mediocre scientists can
produce outstanding work"
P.M.S. Blackett
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 04:42:35 AM |
|
|
your Fertz invention i smuch more powerful
please bypass the old cathastrophy! and senile sabotager
Y.Porat
-----------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 12:43:03 AM |
|
|
Hi Jhony!!!
you are very cleaver but ....
may be just move a little your ***** and try to find
listen carefully)
*THE EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE*
GOT IT ?? EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE!!
for 32 electrons in shell No 4
we are not speaking about *theories* nor jumping to conclusions from
light elements
(the shell model is right only in ligh tatoms)
we are looking for experimental evidence ie
chemical ,spectral crystalline what ever you what
got it smatguy demagogic parrot ???
not waht is in the jumping to conclusion immagination of parrots .
so
good luck by finding it
you can recute the biggest insitues of technology fot that mission.
all the best
Y.Porat
----------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Schutkeker" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 03:55:26 PM |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <maporat@012.net.il> wrote in news:1108795383.574218.303090
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Hi Jhony!!!
you are very cleaver but ....
may be just move a little your ***** and try to find
listen carefully)
*THE EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE*
GOT IT ?? EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE!!
for 32 electrons in shell No 4
we are not speaking about *theories* nor jumping to conclusions from
light elements
(the shell model is right only in ligh tatoms)
we are looking for experimental evidence ie
chemical ,spectral crystalline what ever you what
got it smatguy demagogic parrot ???
not waht is in the jumping to conclusion immagination of parrots .
so
good luck by finding it
you can recute the biggest insitues of technology fot that mission.
all the best
I haven't the vaguest idea what you're gassing on about. But you got one
part right; I AM very clever.
Is English your native language or your second language?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Schutkeker" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
24 Feb 2005 10:14:27 AM |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <maporat@012.net.il> wrote in news:1108795383.574218.303090
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Hi Jhony!!!
you are very cleaver but ....
may be just move a little your ***** and try to find listen carefully)
*THE EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE* GOT IT ?? EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE!!
for 32 electrons in shell No 4
we are not speaking about *theories* nor jumping to conclusions from
light elements (the shell model is right only in ligh tatoms)
Is the transition threshhold at n=31?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
24 Feb 2005 11:05:01 AM |
|
|
??????????
i dont know what is the transition threashold
i know subshells are 'fiddled' here and there
as one is fitting it to the theopry
without experimental justificatuons just fitting to the 'theory'
imho even 31 is *far from being close* to experimental evidemce.
TIA
Y.Porat
------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Schutkeker" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
01 Mar 2005 02:33:00 PM |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <maporat@012.net.il> wrote in news:1109264701.060914.38770
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
i dont know what is the transition threashold
i know subshells are 'fiddled' here and there
as one is fitting it to the theopry
without experimental justificatuons just fitting to the 'theory'
imho even 31 is *far from being close* to experimental evidemce.
You do realize that the single electron configuration is the only fully
solved system, don't you? If you have ideas for extending the existing
theory, without discarding its obvious successes, I'm sure you'll find
willing listeners.
The existing theory isn't wrong, it's unfinished, and I'm sure that I speak
for all the physicists here that we'd love to see an undiscovered super-
genius appear from nowhere, with the rest of the solution in hand.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
02 Mar 2005 02:10:46 AM |
|
|
John Schutkeker wrote:
"Y.Porat" <maporat@012.net.il> wrote in news:1109264701.060914.38770
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
i dont know what is the transition threashold
i know subshells are 'fiddled' here and there
as one is fitting it to the theopry
without experimental justificatuons just fitting to the 'theory'
imho even 31 is *far from being close* to experimental evidemce.
You do realize that the single electron configuration is the only
fully
solved system, don't you?
nmo it i s not fully solved
if you think so you are a too hapy man!!
If you have ideas for extending the existing
theory, without discarding its obvious successes, I'm sure you'll
find
willing listeners.
------------
i dont deny the successes
i only say it is not good enough
because there are too many riddles wating next to the door
unsolved.
you probably are not aware that qm didnt went much fuether
tha solving say the iron atom - not much further
because there - it is stuck in the mudd.
i wonder if the 'generation prolem' is fully solved
people have no grean idea about the inner structure
of the nucleus.
no one can predict which nuc can be trnasformed to another one
all laong the periodic table
i shoed at least some unexplained facts to be right
ie some of my unprecedented predictions are verified
see for instance the thread : 'isotope decay cahins'
no one can bring experimental evidence for 32 electrons
in a shell.
etc etc etc.
on the other hand i bring experimental evidence
that a small atom like al has practially the same volume
as a big atom like Gold!!
(another good indication against the shell 'pyramide'
of the existing theory for big atoms
(it is right only pasrtially in small atoms.
etc etc etc
btw have you piped in to my little site ???
di dyou understood something of it ???
----------
------------
----------------
The existing theory isn't wrong,
it is wrong for instance with the 'pyramid of electrons'
for a heavy atom and i started to show it !!
just remember and re do it about the lack of posibility
of amyone to show 32 electrons in ashell
many people are folowing our discussion and yould
happily to it if just they could !!!
----------------
it's unfinished,
waht is unfinished:? the existing theory?
if yes than we have at last a common undertanding (:-)
and I'm sure that I speak
for all the physicists here that we'd love to see an undiscovered
super-
genius appear from nowhere, with the rest of the solution in hand.
no need for a genious we need just a person who is not
an austridge!!!
i already told somewhere the story of Christoph Coulomb!
he was not a genious the only virtue he had was
just to be able to collect the known data
and combine it in the righ t way!!
and not to be a prisoner of paradigma as a whole bundle!!!!!
ie to be able to see that that paradigma has some crackes
init.
he new and notices what other didnt do
tha once and a while some starge corpses
came from the west side of the atlantic
he new that fromtime to time unknown plants
were coming from that diraction
he knwew what too many others failes to internalise
that the globe is spherical etc etc etc
now his 'ingenuity ' was just to combine al of that together
and to be persistant with his struggle
the story is that he came to the king of Spain
wi thr suggestion to recrute ships and staff
for that mission
all the kings advidors were attending and advised against him
so he just turned to go out!
then it is not known why the king changed his mind
called Coulomb back (while he was actually out)
and decided to give him a chance!
and the reast is history!!!
--------------
all the best
Y.Porat
------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 12:55:32 AM |
|
|
Y.Porat wrote:
Hi Jhony!!!
you are very cleaver but ....
may be just move a little your ***** and try to find
listen carefully)
*THE EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE*
GOT IT ?? EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE!!
[snip]
We heard you.
We have heard you for the last 60 times you have asked the same stupid
fucking question.
Take a hint.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 06:12:19 AM |
|
|
ok
just instead of handwaving
just bring at least i little quote from your sources that answers my
question
(and remember : experimental evidence not theories.)
and show everybody yhat i am supid.
untill now i dint see a drop of evidence
(please note that i didnt use any word of personal abuse
though it was on the tip on my fingers)
---------------
TIA
Y.Porat
-----------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 11:55:29 AM |
|
|
Y.Porat wrote:
ok
just instead of handwaving
just bring at least i little quote from your sources that answers my
question
(and remember : experimental evidence not theories.)
You didn't read the references when they were last given to you. Or is
that why you keep changing the number of electrons you whine about?
Will you not be satisfied until evidence is given for everything up to
and including Uranium?
and show everybody yhat i am supid.
untill now i dint see a drop of evidence
(please note that i didnt use any word of personal abuse
though it was on the tip on my fingers)
---------------
TIA
Y.Porat
-----------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 01:21:25 PM |
|
|
i dont have access to those book you quoted
so may be just copy a little smaple of it
that is relevant to my question and let me a way to get it
here.
just a little example will do it
so we can make some examination of it
the standard electron shell scheme is something like that (for a heavy
element
like say Lead
i dont mind the very fine diffrences
i would be glad to see it in principle
but you have to keep in mind that if you just collect elecrtons from
all shells and stick them somehow as wishful thinking
it will not answer my question because
in the atom there are a lot of electrons
there is even a theory that all havy particles are composed of
electron family
do just to stock a pile of electrons from here and there is not my
claim
it is thr exact fine detailed to the last one if you like even not
wihtthe acuracy
of a single electron
if it is close to the theory it is fine for me and willkeep me quite!1
so if i am not wrong the common general scheme is something like this;
2 8 16 (18) 32 18 , (some single ones)
my suspicion is that th eexperimental evidence
if far away from that !!!
i know thwere ar4 subshells ok fine but i would like to see
a whole set of 32 electrons even by collectingt subshells
but in that case onw has to show that it is not a collection from
very distance shels iow
an 'invited by the theory collection'!!! without experimental grounds.
------------------
TIA
Y.Porat
----------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 01:27:03 AM |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <maporat@012.net.il> wrote in message
news:1108840885.110740.18940@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
i dont have access to those book you quoted
[snip]
Then you are not in a position to continue whining.
--
Franz
"As we grow older we understand more and more and we do less and less"
Puppi
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 01:39:25 AM |
|
|
Franzi
you see that serious peiople are leading a serious ddiscussion here
and you are disturbing just with void value remarks
is it your age or was it always your stile ??
we need some 'meat' here not just mumbling
it is quite obvious that yoy have an interst to sabotage this thread
so now !
i did a favour to you by showing you your stupid idea of the Fertz
so now you owe me a favour in reverse
to show me my stupidity with my title claim
so just fold up your sleeves get of your farting arm cheir
and bring us some ;meat' infoermation to show everybody
that i am an idiot. but it has to be substantiated by scintific
experimental facts !!
now a remark to other readers:
just bypass the old armchir mumbler!
btw Frantz is by any chance 'Gisse' is just another mane of *yours*
!!!??
(i am interested in some lessons in crookism (;-)) i need it badly.
keep well and donr forget your pills
Y.Porat
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 12:13:13 PM |
|
|
"Y.Porat" <maporat@012.net.il> wrote in message
news:1108885165.910272.3520@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Franzi
you see that serious peiople are leading a serious ddiscussion here
and you are disturbing just with void value remarks
is it your age or was it always your stile ??
If you were to reinstate the headers and the context which you
snipped, I might consider replying.
--
Franz
"The great tragedy of science -- the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis
by an ugly fact."
T.H. Huxley
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 05:50:44 PM |
|
|
Porat,
Shell is an outmoded concept because it suggests something has needs to
be filled before you start in on the next. The 4th "shell" (n=4
principle quantum number= n4) does indeed constain 2n^2 = 32 electrons
when filled, but by the time n4 is full there are already 18 additional
electrons in n5 and 2 in n6. These go in before the last 14 electrons
go into n4 (these go in basically as the 4f orbitals fill with 14
electrons in the lanthanides). It's a little difficult to see full
"shell" behavior from the periodic table alone, because the shells
don't fill in sequence as the atoms get heavier. There's overlap, so
you see lower subshells fill in higher shells (sometimes 2 shells up)
before the last subshells fill in lower ones.
Since you seem to be having difficulty reading a book, I'll give you
the electrons in the various shells at the ends of the various periods
in the periodic table. Maybe that will help. The numbers are electrons
in each n shell, as you hit the end of the period.
P1: 2
P2: 2 8 This means 2 in n1 and 8 in n2
P2: 2 8 8
P4: 2 8 8 18
P5: 2 8 18 18 8
P6: 2 8 18 32 18 8 (total of 86 in 6 shells, but only first 4
shells completely filled)
P7: 2 8 18 32 32 18 8 (total 118 in 7 "shells," but still only
first 4 shells completely filled)
You can see that even at the end of P7, which includes 6 elements not
yet discovered, the n5 shell isn't filled, even though there are now
electrons in n6 and n7. The shell n5 will have 2(5^2) = 50 electrons,
but the sticker, and ones still missing even at 118, are the very high
energy and angular momentum 5g orbital electrons, of which there will
be 18. But none of these g orbitals has yet been populated, even by
118. You see the last 8 electrons going in after 110, are expected to
go into 7s and 7p orbitals.
S.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 06:03:28 PM |
|
|
By the way, the total numbers added up across the periods give the
numbers of electrons in the various noble gases. Thus, 2 for helium, 10
for neon, down to 86 for radon. Element 118 at the end of period 7 is
expected to be a radioactive nobel gas, but again hasn't yet been seen.
It has a name, but all these names are now just mumble mumbles
constructed from their latin element numbers, and I personally
pronounce them all "unobtanium".
SBH
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 12:28:41 AM |
|
|
so SBH
it is not clear to me on which side youare
on my side or on Gisses side.
as i sayed
the problem is not with light elements it is with the heavy ones
now just copllecting 86 electrons in one bigg pile' is no evidence
since i explained that if you can collect 86 you can as well collect 96
because the atom is full of electrons including in medium 'shells'
and even from closer to the nuc
even Neutrons are able to be stripped of electrons !!!
so it is not an answer to my doubts
by doubets are against the whole
'pyramide structure' of
2 8 16 32 etc
that are alleged to by a very defined structure!!
but that is only in the dreams of parrots and crooks!!!
btw the structure and world arangement of
crooks and parrots suckers - was always a wonderful agangement !!!
(all laong the human history. and even to this very day .... in
'scince' !!!)
Y.Porat
-----------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 06:10:21 PM |
|
|
Wups, P4 obviously should be 2 8 18 8.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 12:39:45 AM |
|
|
thank you S
anyway you see that all that is a big mess in which each one
can arange it for his convenence
now my main point it ....
i am not interested in nice theoretic stories
i am interested only on *a comltete set of unequivocal experimental
prove]
of even just one element that will fulfill all that' pyramide'
because as i sayed
the heavy atom is so full of electrons that every one can go into that
'supermerket' and stock out of the 'shelves' any 'pile' of merchandise'
into his 'supermarket trolly' and go home happy! (:-)
as he wishes.
all the best
Y.Porat
-----------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 01:24:11 AM |
|
|
thank you S
anyway you see that all that is a big mess in which each one
can arange it for his convenence <<
COMMENT
No, not really. The periodic table is "real" inasmuch as the elements
placed underneath each other (at least in the side blocks) really do
resemble each other physically and chemically to large degree. The
nobel gases are like each other, and so also the halogens, the alkalai
metals, the alkaline earth metals, the chalcogens, and so on. These
things clearly form blocks with repeating numbers of 2 and 6, with a
nobel gas ending each time you add 8 electrons that way, with a halogen
just before each.
Although the columns are not so clear in the middle of the table, still
clearly a block of 10 transition metals interupts the main 2 and 6
sequence after a while, and then clearly a block of 14 rare earths
interupts THAT. So whatever is going on, it's a series of repeating
patterns of 2, 6, 10 and 14. Mendelev saw these patterns, and
predicted new elements from them. Bohr knew these patterns and realized
they represented repeating and nested elements of 2, 6, 10 and 14 in
electron structure in 1920, six years before the Shroedinger equation.
When that equation was worked out, it was found that it predicted a
nested repeating structure of orbitals with room for --- get this--
exactly 2, 6, 10 and 14 electrons. These mathematical orbitals were
named for the spectral lines s, p, d and f which stood for sharp,
principal, diffuse, and fine. Lines which had also been known for years
and which were seen in the very elements which exibited the repetative
sequence in question. For example, the d lines are not seen until the
10-block of transition metals arrives. Nor are f lines seen until the
14-block of lanthanides appears.
Sorry, Porat. We're not just making this stuff up. The chemical
repeating pattern and the spectra were known long before these numbers
fell out of Shroedinger's math. And they fall out of Shroedinger's math
even if you don't don't know anything about chemistry or specroscopy.
So that's nature trying to tell you the same thing, three times in
three different ways. Believe it.
S.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 11:33:03 PM |
|
|
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com wrote:
thank you S
anyway you see that all that is a big mess in which each one
can arange it for his convenence <<
COMMENT
No, not really. The periodic table is "real" inasmuch as the
elements
placed underneath each other (at least in the side blocks) really do
resemble each other physically and chemically to large degree. The
nobel gases are like each other, and so also the halogens, the
alkalai
metals, the alkaline earth metals, the chalcogens, and so on. These
things clearly form blocks with repeating numbers of 2 and 6, with a
nobel gas ending each time you add 8 electrons that way, with a
halogen
just before each.
Although the columns are not so clear in the middle of the table,
still
-----------
Hi SBH
untill now you are the only one whois talking business!!
all the others are shear parrots.
now about the mendeliev
just have a pook on my model in my pdf file:
http://www.geocities.com/porat_y/mypage.html
it is clear there why the periodicy
quartets of alpha are added to the nuc and adding
multiples of 8 Protons
yet it does not go like that all laong
sometines it is an addition of a quarted togethjer
with two deutrons
sometimes a quartet wiht two aditional alpha particles
but the main pont is that
*it is only the edge (pole ) free particles that do the main job
ie not those ones that are licked inside.
now something that no other theory can explain as mine :
since you mentioned the nice repetitive overlap of lines
in that periodic table:
it is known to chemists that it is rather the firt raw
that deos not fit exactly ie
you have to shift it *one step* (i dont remember just now)
if it is ) one atep to the ;left of to the 'right'
anyway one step!!
so do you know the reason for it ??
if yes just tell me , if no even then just come back to me
it seems that only my model explaines it tangibly !!
now about the lanthanoids
this is another 'problem' if to put it mildly to the exosting
theory!!
now to my main point !!!
you didnt notice that i sayed it clearly:
there is no problem with ligh telements!!!
the problem starts *with the heavy ones !!!
even in your above and below explanations
you never got to the substantiated experimentally
the 32 electrons in one shell or even in a group of shells
now please note:
once you start to 'fiddle wiht thise subshells
and 'move them' as you wish - the sky is the limit
with the manipolation ability that is not scince!!
that is manipulation!!
soagin
though you intillnow was the best responder tomy claim
you didnt answer my '32 electrons' prpblem
and if to sleak frankly you and no one else will ever do it
if you see my model you start to understand why:
and 'there is no cocunuts at the north pole'
so you will never find them there.
internalising it is veery important for making further advance
in scince !!!
so that is why i am working on it so hard by
(leading an unpopular campain is difficult mentally
and even physically.
try to beleive me ... but i know well whats on stake!!)
'swiming against the main streem' so long and so persistantly.
fighting all the parrots and wolfes
and crooks around..... not an easy job.....
antway - i am not complaining !(:-)
all the best
Y.Porat
--------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
23 Feb 2005 06:41:52 AM |
|
|
and another question
it i sknown to chemists that in the Mendeleiev periodic table
the first line raw) is not fully compatible to the folowing raws.
there is need to move aside one step in order to get
a better compatibility with the folowing ones!
so what is the common explanation to that ???(if any??!!)
TIA
Y.Porat
--------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
19 Feb 2005 03:50:09 PM |
|
|
Y.Porat wrote:
i dont have access to those book you quoted
so may be just copy a little smaple of it
that is relevant to my question and let me a way to get it
here.
[snip]
Then there is no point in getting you the references you desire since
you are incapable of visiting a library.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Where has the 32 electrons in one shell has gone ??!! |
20 Feb 2005 12:18:28 AM |
|
|
words words words
you obviously are looking for excuses and walking around the bush.
you cant do it even for youself !!!
you will never fing *experimental evidence* for the
'pyramid structure' of
2 8 16 32 18 (or 16) 2 (3 4 )
experimental evidence is chemical spectral crystalline
whatever...
you have to find the whole pyramid structure not just a collection
of smaller subshells from here and there!!!
Good luck
now Gisse you are lying and cheating - i dont beleive you
you are an unrealiable man!! and not a serious scintist.
becuase once you had that alleged information you could find a way
to bring here at least a piece of it !!!
Y.Porat
---------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
