How can the subatomic spin and vibrate?
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Anti matter and matter cannot be kept together
Next: College Algebra 5E Dugopolski Solutions Manual and test bank is available for purchase at affordable prices. Contact me at allsolutionmanuals11[at]gmail.com to buy it today.
From: PD on 6 Jul 2010 18:40 On Jul 6, 4:49 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 6, 2:35 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 6, 12:56 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 6, 8:43 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 5, 5:01 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:17 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 1:43 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Point mass can in no way rotate. Spin is for a changing size of > > > > > > > rotation. Particles never rotate or have changes in size. > > > > > > > > But they do vibrate by their quantum aether wave flow push. > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > Nobody ever said a point particle had to rotate. > > > > > > But they say Spin which is even more nonsensical. Spin is for changing > > > > > sizes of rotation rate; like an ice skater pulling in her arms. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > A body does not need > > > > > > to be rotating to possess angular momentum. > > > > > Spin is an operator on a Hilbert space. It has nothing to do with > > > > classical rotation.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Yes. But that makes it nonsense. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > No, it doesn't. It means it's a word that you recognize from somewhere > > else that is being used with a new and different definition. So the > > FIRST thing to do is to ask what this new and different definition of > > "spin" is, so that you will not continue to be confused. > > > PD- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > You show me how a mathematical point particle can rotate. It doesn't. Quantum mechanical spin doesn't involve rotation of any kind. > No. It doesn't happen. > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: BURT on 6 Jul 2010 20:55 On Jul 6, 3:40 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 6, 4:49 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 6, 2:35 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 6, 12:56 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 6, 8:43 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 5, 5:01 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:17 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 1:43 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Point mass can in no way rotate. Spin is for a changing size of > > > > > > > > rotation. Particles never rotate or have changes in size. > > > > > > > > > But they do vibrate by their quantum aether wave flow push. > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > Nobody ever said a point particle had to rotate. > > > > > > > But they say Spin which is even more nonsensical. Spin is for changing > > > > > > sizes of rotation rate; like an ice skater pulling in her arms. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > A body does not need > > > > > > > to be rotating to possess angular momentum. > > > > > > Spin is an operator on a Hilbert space. It has nothing to do with > > > > > classical rotation.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Yes. But that makes it nonsense. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > No, it doesn't. It means it's a word that you recognize from somewhere > > > else that is being used with a new and different definition. So the > > > FIRST thing to do is to ask what this new and different definition of > > > "spin" is, so that you will not continue to be confused. > > > > PD- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > You show me how a mathematical point particle can rotate. > > It doesn't. Quantum mechanical spin doesn't involve rotation of any > kind. The Nobel Committee told me we don't know what we are measuring when we measure spin. Do you know what we are measuring then? Mitch Raemsch > > > > No. It doesn't happen. > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: PD on 7 Jul 2010 09:58 On Jul 6, 7:55 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 6, 3:40 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 6, 4:49 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 6, 2:35 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 6, 12:56 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 6, 8:43 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 5:01 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:17 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 1:43 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Point mass can in no way rotate. Spin is for a changing size of > > > > > > > > > rotation. Particles never rotate or have changes in size. > > > > > > > > > > But they do vibrate by their quantum aether wave flow push. > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > Nobody ever said a point particle had to rotate. > > > > > > > > But they say Spin which is even more nonsensical. Spin is for changing > > > > > > > sizes of rotation rate; like an ice skater pulling in her arms. > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > A body does not need > > > > > > > > to be rotating to possess angular momentum. > > > > > > > Spin is an operator on a Hilbert space. It has nothing to do with > > > > > > classical rotation.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Yes. But that makes it nonsense. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > No, it doesn't. It means it's a word that you recognize from somewhere > > > > else that is being used with a new and different definition. So the > > > > FIRST thing to do is to ask what this new and different definition of > > > > "spin" is, so that you will not continue to be confused. > > > > > PD- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > You show me how a mathematical point particle can rotate. > > > It doesn't. Quantum mechanical spin doesn't involve rotation of any > > kind. > > The Nobel Committee told me we don't know what we are measuring when > we measure spin. Mitch, get some food. Your blood sugar is down. > > Do you know what we are measuring then? > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > No. It doesn't happen. > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: Igor on 7 Jul 2010 11:37 On Jul 6, 5:46 pm, Victar Shawnberger <vic...(a)dcemail.com> wrote: > On Jul 6, 11:34 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 12:43 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > Point mass can in no way rotate. > > > That's right. > > > > Spin is for a changing size of > > > rotation. > > > No, it's not. > > > > Particles never rotate or have changes in size. > > > Yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with quantum mechanical > > spin. > > > Did you make any money today, Mitch? Have you had a decent meal? > > Sir, your aristocracy, i wish could understand > > appears that it has even less to do with quantum mechanics, which btw, > is wrong > The only test of a scientific theory is through observation and experiment. And so far, QM is one of the most successful theories in physics. So that would make your assessment of it a bit invalid.
From: Igor on 7 Jul 2010 11:37
On Jul 6, 5:49 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 6, 2:35 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 6, 12:56 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 6, 8:43 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 5, 5:01 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:17 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 1:43 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Point mass can in no way rotate. Spin is for a changing size of > > > > > > > rotation. Particles never rotate or have changes in size. > > > > > > > > But they do vibrate by their quantum aether wave flow push. > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > Nobody ever said a point particle had to rotate. > > > > > > But they say Spin which is even more nonsensical. Spin is for changing > > > > > sizes of rotation rate; like an ice skater pulling in her arms. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > A body does not need > > > > > > to be rotating to possess angular momentum. > > > > > Spin is an operator on a Hilbert space. It has nothing to do with > > > > classical rotation.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Yes. But that makes it nonsense. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > No, it doesn't. It means it's a word that you recognize from somewhere > > else that is being used with a new and different definition. So the > > FIRST thing to do is to ask what this new and different definition of > > "spin" is, so that you will not continue to be confused. > > > PD- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > You show me how a mathematical point particle can rotate. > No. It doesn't happen. > > Mitch Raemsch Spin wheels. Lather, rinse, repeat. |