Prev: God is not happy
Next: For the first time, scientists observe plants competing with animalsfor food
From: Y.Porat on 13 May 2010 15:23
On May 12, 11:36 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/12/10 4:23 PM, Geode wrote:
>
> > I have always been puzzled how they reasoned the number of molecules
> > in a mol.
> > But I have never find a clear process to state this number.
> > Does anyone had read about it?
> > Geode
> > .
>
>    See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avogadro_constant
>
> "The value of the Avogadro constant was first indicated by Johann Josef
> Loschmidt who, in 1865, estimated the average diameter of the molecules
> in air by a method that is equivalent to calculating the number of
> particles in a given volume of gas.[7] This latter value, the number
> density of particles in an ideal gas, is now called the Loschmidt
> constant in his honour, and is approximately proportional to the
> Avogadro constant. The connection with Loschmidt is the root of the
> symbol L sometimes used for the Avogadro constant, and German language
> literature may refer to both constants by the same name, distinguished
> only by the units of measurement.[8]"

--------------------
and i expanded the Avogadro law
EVEN TO THE LIQUID STATE
AND EVEN TO THE SOLID STATE

(at the solid state it is a bit more complicated !!)

AND FOUND A REVOLUTIONARY FOUNDING :
big Atoms or small Atoms
have actually more or less the same volume
iow

TH E PARADIGM OF MANY SHELLS
OF ELECTRONS IS A FAIRY TALE !!

AND TH E NUMBER OF ELECTRONS
IS NOT ALL ALONG (the periodic table)
THE NUMBER OF POROTONS!!
(protons that are ininner locations of the nuc
LOST THEIR CHARGE WHILE THE NUC WAS CREATED !!!

SEE TABLE 2 AND 3 IN MY ABSTRACT:

http://sites.gooogle .com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract

if you have questions -just ask !!....

ATB
Y.Porat
---------------------------------

From: PD on 13 May 2010 15:56
On May 13, 2:23 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 12, 11:36 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 5/12/10 4:23 PM, Geode wrote:
>
> > > I have always been puzzled how they reasoned the number of molecules
> > > in a mol.
> > > But I have never find a clear process to state this number.
> > > Does anyone had read about it?
> > > Geode
> > > .
>
> >    See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avogadro_constant
>
> > "The value of the Avogadro constant was first indicated by Johann Josef
> > Loschmidt who, in 1865, estimated the average diameter of the molecules
> > in air by a method that is equivalent to calculating the number of
> > particles in a given volume of gas.[7] This latter value, the number
> > density of particles in an ideal gas, is now called the Loschmidt
> > constant in his honour, and is approximately proportional to the
> > Avogadro constant. The connection with Loschmidt is the root of the
> > symbol L sometimes used for the Avogadro constant, and German language
> > literature may refer to both constants by the same name, distinguished
> > only by the units of measurement.[8]"
>
> --------------------
> and i expanded the Avogadro law
>  EVEN TO  THE  LIQUID STATE
> AND EVEN TO THE SOLID STATE
>
> (at the solid state it is a bit more complicated !!)
>
> AND FOUND A REVOLUTIONARY FOUNDING :
> big Atoms or small Atoms
> have actually more or less the same volume
> iow

Big news.
http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/covalent_radius/index.html

>
> TH E  PARADIGM OF MANY SHELLS
> OF ELECTRONS IS A FAIRY TALE !!
>
> AND TH E  NUMBER OF ELECTRONS
> IS NOT ALL ALONG (the periodic table)
> THE NUMBER OF POROTONS!!
> (protons that are ininner locations of the   nuc
> LOST THEIR CHARGE WHILE THE NUC WAS CREATED !!!
>
> SEE TABLE 2 AND 3 IN MY ABSTRACT:
>
>  http://sites.gooogle.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract
>
> if you have questions   -just  ask !!....
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> ---------------------------------

From: Y.Porat on 14 May 2010 01:51
On May 13, 9:56 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 13, 2:23 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 12, 11:36 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 5/12/10 4:23 PM, Geode wrote:
>
> > > > I have always been puzzled how they reasoned the number of molecules
> > > > in a mol.
> > > > But I have never find a clear process to state this number.
> > > > Does anyone had read about it?
> > > > Geode
> > > > .
>
> > >    See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avogadro_constant
>
> > > "The value of the Avogadro constant was first indicated by Johann Josef
> > > Loschmidt who, in 1865, estimated the average diameter of the molecules
> > > in air by a method that is equivalent to calculating the number of
> > > particles in a given volume of gas.[7] This latter value, the number
> > > density of particles in an ideal gas, is now called the Loschmidt
> > > constant in his honour, and is approximately proportional to the
> > > Avogadro constant. The connection with Loschmidt is the root of the
> > > symbol L sometimes used for the Avogadro constant, and German language
> > > literature may refer to both constants by the same name, distinguished
> > > only by the units of measurement.[8]"
>
> > --------------------
> > and i expanded the Avogadro law
> >  EVEN TO  THE  LIQUID STATE
> > AND EVEN TO THE SOLID STATE
>
> > (at the solid state it is a bit more complicated !!)
>
> > AND FOUND A REVOLUTIONARY FOUNDING :
> > big Atoms or small Atoms
> > have actually more or less the same volume
> > iow
>
> Big news.http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/covalent_radius/index.html
>
>
>
> > TH E  PARADIGM OF MANY SHELLS
> > OF ELECTRONS IS A FAIRY TALE !!
>
> > AND TH E  NUMBER OF ELECTRONS
> > IS NOT ALL ALONG (the periodic table)
> > THE NUMBER OF POROTONS!!
> > (protons that are ininner locations of the   nuc
> > LOST THEIR CHARGE WHILE THE NUC WAS CREATED !!!
>
> > SEE TABLE 2 AND 3 IN MY ABSTRACT:
>
> >  http://sites.gooogle.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract
>
> > if you have questions   -just  ask !!....
>
> > ATB
> > Y.Porat
> > ---------------------------------

of course big news !!!
i looked in your 'revolutionary' link
so ????
what are they talking about??
hydrogen covaelnt bond ??
so waht is news there ???
first of all :
since you have my book
it is from 1993 !!

2
ddi anyone before me claimed that it means that
THE ELECTRON LENGTH IS MORE OR LESS CONSTANT ALL ALONG THE
ELEMENTS OF THE PERIODIC TABLE ??!!!
3
DID ANYONE BEFORE ME SHOWED THAT
ALLTHE STORY OF SHELLS -MANY SHELS OF ELECTRONS --
IS ONE BIG BULLSHIT ??!!
iow
there are no big Atoms and 'small atoms'
while allof them have more or less the same volume
(anyway not at all linerarily proportionally
to their Atomic mass but rather far from that -
that they are nearly the same volume
with only a few percent deviations
as i show in table 2 above ??!!
3
ddi anyone showed that there are different
electron orbitals that stem from different
'mother orbitals
ie
that stem from a proton
or stem of a deuteron
or stem eben from a twolinds of deutrons
'back deutron or head deutron
eetc etc
inshort PD
it isnot only that you are a thief that stolemy book
on top of that
YOU UNDERSTOOD NOTHING ABOUT IT
PROBABLY BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT CLEAVE AVER ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND IT S
IMPORTANCE
(revolutionary importance - historic importance )
but much worse than that
YOU DO YOUR BEST TO 'FAIL IT' !!
AND THAT IS UNFORGIVABLE FOR YOU !!!
4
if you jsut ask questions about it
to teST IT to find if it is verified
THAT IS OK FOR ME !!
tofinf if it is really unprecedented
that is as well OK for me!
actually had you do it 'Bon fide '
i would thank you for it
but IF you do it with insincere intentions
OR CROOKS THEFT INTENTIONS --
THAT IS UNFORGIVABLE !!!
5
it seems that you have a lot to learn
my model
(with my help because no one cnn do it betetr than me )) --
before you open your mouth !!
6
do you still have my book?
or you gave it to someone else ??

keep well
Y.Porat
-----------------------


ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------




From: PD on 14 May 2010 10:10
On May 14, 12:51 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 13, 9:56 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 13, 2:23 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 12, 11:36 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 5/12/10 4:23 PM, Geode wrote:
>
> > > > > I have always been puzzled how they reasoned the number of molecules
> > > > > in a mol.
> > > > > But I have never find a clear process to state this number.
> > > > > Does anyone had read about it?
> > > > > Geode
> > > > > .
>
> > > >    See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avogadro_constant
>
> > > > "The value of the Avogadro constant was first indicated by Johann Josef
> > > > Loschmidt who, in 1865, estimated the average diameter of the molecules
> > > > in air by a method that is equivalent to calculating the number of
> > > > particles in a given volume of gas.[7] This latter value, the number
> > > > density of particles in an ideal gas, is now called the Loschmidt
> > > > constant in his honour, and is approximately proportional to the
> > > > Avogadro constant. The connection with Loschmidt is the root of the
> > > > symbol L sometimes used for the Avogadro constant, and German language
> > > > literature may refer to both constants by the same name, distinguished
> > > > only by the units of measurement.[8]"
>
> > > --------------------
> > > and i expanded the Avogadro law
> > >  EVEN TO  THE  LIQUID STATE
> > > AND EVEN TO THE SOLID STATE
>
> > > (at the solid state it is a bit more complicated !!)
>
> > > AND FOUND A REVOLUTIONARY FOUNDING :
> > > big Atoms or small Atoms
> > > have actually more or less the same volume
> > > iow
>
> > Big news.http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/covalent_radius/index.html
>
> > > TH E  PARADIGM OF MANY SHELLS
> > > OF ELECTRONS IS A FAIRY TALE !!
>
> > > AND TH E  NUMBER OF ELECTRONS
> > > IS NOT ALL ALONG (the periodic table)
> > > THE NUMBER OF POROTONS!!
> > > (protons that are ininner locations of the   nuc
> > > LOST THEIR CHARGE WHILE THE NUC WAS CREATED !!!
>
> > > SEE TABLE 2 AND 3 IN MY ABSTRACT:
>
> > >  http://sites.gooogle.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract
>
> > > if you have questions   -just  ask !!....
>
> > > ATB
> > > Y.Porat
> > > ---------------------------------
>
> of course big news !!!
> i looked in your 'revolutionary'   link
> so ????

No, it's not revolutionary. It's freshman chemistry.

> what are they talking about??
> hydrogen covaelnt bond ??

No. It is covalent radius for ALL the elements.
It's freshman chemistry.

> so waht is news there   ???

It's not new at all. It's decades old. Many decades.
It's freshman chemistry.

> first of all :
> since you have my book
> it is  from 1993  !!
>
> 2
> ddi anyone before me claimed that it means that
> THE ELECTRON LENGTH IS MORE OR LESS CONSTANT ALL ALONG THE
> ELEMENTS OF THE PERIODIC  TABLE ??!!!

Look at the covalent radii. Old news.

> 3
> DID ANYONE BEFORE ME SHOWED THAT
> ALLTHE STORY OF SHELLS -MANY SHELS OF ELECTRONS  --
> IS ONE BIG BULLSHIT ??!!

The data in that table of covalent radii is completely consistent with
quantum mechanics.
Old news.

> iow
> there are  no big Atoms and 'small atoms'
> while allof them have more or less the same volume
> (anyway not at all linerarily proportionally
> to  their Atomic mass but rather far from that

Nor is there any quantum mechanical claim that there would be any kind
of linear proportionality. Perhaps you don't know what quantum
mechanics actually says.

> -
> that they are nearly the same volume
> with only a few percent deviations
> as i show in table 2 above ??!!
> 3
> ddi anyone showed that there are different
> electron orbitals that stem from different
> 'mother orbitals
> ie
> that stem from a proton
> or stem of a deuteron
> or stem eben from a twolinds of deutrons
> 'back deutron or head deutron
> eetc etc
> inshort PD
> it isnot only that you are a thief that stolemy book
> on top of that
> YOU UNDERSTOOD NOTHING ABOUT IT
> PROBABLY BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT CLEAVE AVER ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND IT S
> IMPORTANCE
> (revolutionary importance - historic importance )
> but much worse than that
> YOU DO YOUR BEST TO 'FAIL IT' !!
> AND THAT IS UNFORGIVABLE FOR YOU !!!
> 4
> if you jsut ask questions about it
> to    teST IT  to find if it is verified
> THAT IS OK FOR ME !!
> tofinf if it is really unprecedented
> that is as well OK for me!
> actually had you do it 'Bon fide  '
> i would thank you for it
> but IF  you do it with insincere intentions
> OR CROOKS THEFT   INTENTIONS --
> THAT IS UNFORGIVABLE   !!!
> 5
> it seems that you have a lot to learn
> my model
> (with my help because no one cnn do   it betetr than me ))  --
> before you open your mouth !!
> 6
> do you still  have my book?
> or you gave it to   someone else   ??
>
> keep well
> Y.Porat
> -----------------------
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> -----------------

From: Geode on 18 May 2010 17:48
On 12 mayo, 23:10, Uncle Al <Uncle...(a)hate.spam.net> wrote:
> Geode wrote:
>
> > I have always been puzzled how they reasoned the number of molecules
> > in a mol.
> > But I have never find a clear process to state this number.
> > Does anyone had read about it?
> > Geode
> > .
>
> Depends on the mole.  Any unit of mass is good - gram, kilogram,
> ounce, pound, ton - to get a consistent system.  12 grams of C-12 is
> Avogadro's Number of carbon atoms.  South of the border, Avocado's
> Number will get you a guacamole.
>
> And you deserved it.
>
> --
> Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
>  (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

I was asking about the process of reasoning.
For a certain mass of a gas or a solid or liquid, "there must be a
number of molecules", or atoms. That is purely intuitive, and do not
have much room to argue against the idea.

But the issue to me, beside the logical answer of "quite a lot", is
to know how things run till they found the right answer.
Of course there must be a lot of atoms, or molecules. How they
arrived at a number so precise, 6,022 (10^23)?
If "the lot" were a thousand times smaller, like 10^20, then the atoms
would weight a thousand time more than at present.

Even that story about about the Millikan drop of oil, is not enough.
He discovered that the electrostatic force could be one, two, or
three, times stronger. Meaning that the drop lost one, two or three
electrons, because of the radiation of the arc, (UV photons), etc. But
this experiment, at that point do not gives much of a hint about if
the number of molecules are 10^20 or 10^23.
Other questions had to be relatives to phenomenons of interference.
Then, they have to determine the wave length of several types of
light.
So, in general, the case must a be sort of handmade lace. For I
understand these numbers are not capricious.
There must be sound reasons to determine that the significant number
was 6, not 5, or 3, or 8. And then, the exponential was 23 nor 20 or
18. There have had a process of reasoning to get each time nearer to
the right number. I understand that this has to be a mess, but I miss
the story of this process of reasoning. Anyone knows it?
Geode
..

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: God is not happy
Next: For the first time, scientists observe plants competing with animalsfor food