Reaction-Action-Activities relationship?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: easy proof for rectangular-wedge tiler Re: the revised Maximum Tiler conjecture in 2D and 3D #522 Correcting Math
Next: Band GAP energy
From: Kumar on 27 Mar 2010 05:37 On Mar 27, 12:07 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_x> wrote: > "Kumar" <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1a5325df-e2b4-411c-bfc9-cc0d06bdb883(a)k5g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 26, 2:14 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_w> wrote: > > > > > > > "Kumar" <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:1c8bb6cd-7803-4756-b179-dc542b0e2d28(a)a10g2000pri.googlegroups.com.... > > On Mar 26, 12:27 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_w> > > wrote: > > > > "Kumar" <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >news:26dbb8cc-24f7-4023-8221-cbcb84f80b59(a)k36g2000prb.googlegroups.com.... > > > On Mar 25, 9:26 pm, Uncle Ben <b...(a)greenba.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 21, 7:46 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 21, 3:26 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 21, 10:57 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 16, 9:34 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mar 16, 7:35 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > Newton's third law is frequently stated > > > > > > > > > > "Action and reaction are equal and opposite > > > > > > > > > To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" > > > > > > > > > > Law is defined as; > > > > > > > > > > The term law is often used to refer to universal principles > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > describe the fundamental nature of something, to universal > > > > > > > > > properties > > > > > > > > > and relationships between things, or to descriptions that > > > > > > > > > purport to > > > > > > > > > explain these principles and > > > > > > > > > relationships.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_(principle) > > > > > > > > > > I have some questions:- > > > > > > > > > > 1. Is it also true that "to every reaction there is equal > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > opposite > > > > > > > > > action"? > > > > > > > > > > 2. Can we consider action or reaction as activities or > > > > > > > > > motions > > > > > > > > > and as > > > > > > > > > law hold universal application, whether above action > > > > > > > > > reaction > > > > > > > > > relationship will apply to all our activities? > > > > > > > > > > Best wishes. > > > > > > > > > It applies to forces. Almost nothing else.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > Will you tell how equal & opposte effect relates to fundamental > > > > > > > forces. I have discussed about EM. What about other three? > > > > > > > > "The interaction of radiation with matter involves the > > > > > > > absorption, > > > > > > > scattering, and emission of photons". Does it not suggest that > > > > > > > excitation of electrons related to just absorption & emission to > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > decaying back? > > > > > > > --------------------- > > > > > > for me the answer is very simple!! > > > > > > 1 > > > > > > it seesm to me that most people here still didnt got it that > > > > > > nothing > > > > > > is done instantaneously > > > > > > iot means that > > > > > > even that time is very short > > > > > > it has > > > > > > its beginning > > > > > > its all the middle points > > > > > > and its end!! > > > > > > each of the above is different !!! > > > > > > just immagine that you strech that tiny time > > > > > > to a whole hour !! (:-) > > > > > > so > > > > > > an ypoint on that one hour is a different story: > > > > > > the start point can be > > > > > > either start of the process > > > > > > or the end of it !!! > > > > > > so that **start point ** can be > > > > > > either the start of excitation > > > > > > or the end of excitation!! -- > > > > > > that leads to decay > > > > > > > metaphorically > > > > > > > you can START climbing a mountain (excitation) > > > > > > and you can as well > > > > > > > **start **descending a mountain !!!...(decay process ) > > > > > > or vice versa ?? !! > > > > > > ATB > > > > > > Y.Porat > > > > > > ------------------------------- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Yes but decay process only emit photons. Not so?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Kumar, decay processes can emit many things besides photons. > > > > > You need to learn basic physics before trying to discus physics in > > > > this newsgroup. Go to school!- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Pls tell me more about it or provide link. However we are discussing > > > here about if decaying back can be considered as a reason to equal & > > > opposite reaction. [Spritually, equal & opposte reaction can have some > > > relavance to Causality-cause and effect or Karma theory] > > > "Causality is the relationship between an event (the cause) and a > > > second event (the effect), where the second event is a consequence of > > > the first.["http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality > > > > ============================================== > > > Kumar, there is no problem with discussing physics here, that's a > > > learning process too. Bonehead Green is a worthless bigot without any > > > integrity and nobody's uncle. He doesn't have any integrity because he > > > refuses to admit it when he's been proven wrong. He's no scientist, > > > he's a dumb ex-schoolteacher. > > > > You are correct that decay processes emit photons (packets of energy), > > > although not "only" photons. > > > Decaying "back" would require the photon returning and that doesn't > > > happen too often in nuclear decay. However, in principle this is not as > > > impossible as it may at first seem, many chemical reactions can be > > > thought > > > of as decay processes, with hydrogen and oxygen "emitting" water as well > > > as heat. Some reactions are endothermic. > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endothermic > > > There are 118 (to date) elements and it is commonly thought that most > > > of these were produced from hydrogen in the core of a star which later > > > exploded. Whatever the process, they do exist and if they contain energy > > > as uranium does then that energy must have gone into the process.- Hide > > > quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Thanks. However I am taliking about decaying back of electrons after > > excitation due to some applied energy to atoms. Whether this also emit > > other things than photons? > > =============================================== > > Not really, although the atom as a whole can be knocked around a bit. > > The easiest way to understand quantum theory is to think of it in terms > > of money. Let coins represent quantities of energy, and you have no > > coins that have fractional values. If I give you 10 you can spend 10 or > > spend 5, 3, 2 or spend 1 ten times, but you can never spend 4 or 6 or 7 > > or 8 or 9. If you want to spend 4 then you must spend 1 four times, 2 > > twice > > or 3 and 1. Giving a photon to an atom (excitation) is like giving it a > > coin. > > Once it has the coin (energy) the only thing it can do is spend it or keep > > it > > for a rainy day, but it can spend part of the energy as long as it is an > > allowed quantity. We know this from the spectrum, which is different > > for each element. > >http://www.physics.umd.edu/courses/Phys401/bedaque06/discrete_spectra... > > Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Thanks. Good example. It also cover corresponding elergy levels. > However pls tell how atoms keep energy or remain in excitation for > prolonged time? Is there a tendancy to decay back after excitation & > come to their natural/lowest level? Regards. > =============================================== > Science is the observation, investigation and explanation of natural > phenomena. Questions in the form of "how...?" or "why...?" based > on your assumptions may have no answer, especially if your assumption > is incorrect. How does the Moon stay in orbit around the Earth? Is > there a tendency for it to fly off into space? Well, yes there is, and > it stays in orbit because gravity keeps it there. So why doesn't it fall > to Earth? Because it has a tendency to fly off into space! But we cannot > say what gravity *is*, we can only say what it does. This is enough to > enable us to launch artificial satellites into orbit, but not enough to > say how gravity works. We have to accept that it does. So... what is a > "prolonged time"? Why should there be a "natural/lowest" level? > Perhaps the natural level is the highest level! Why should 2 be more > than 1? How does a chicken lay eggs? Why do you get tears in your > eyes when you are sad? Why do you laugh? (Think about it, it's a > very silly thing to do, coughing up puffs of air to express pleasure.) > Atoms keep energy for a prolonged time because they did NOT change. > Tendencies are not certainties, they are instead a statistical measure of a > change, there is no guarantee that tossing a coin will come up heads, > but one expects it to happen for half of the number of trials IF it is > tossed.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - By natural I mean an inherant sense or right & wrong. Anyway, what cause electrons to decay back & come to lower level & leave photons?
From: Y.Porat on 27 Mar 2010 06:56 On Mar 27, 11:37 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 27, 12:07 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_x> > wrote: > > > > > "Kumar" <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:1a5325df-e2b4-411c-bfc9-cc0d06bdb883(a)k5g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > > On Mar 26, 2:14 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_w> wrote: > > > > "Kumar" <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >news:1c8bb6cd-7803-4756-b179-dc542b0e2d28(a)a10g2000pri.googlegroups.com.... > > > On Mar 26, 12:27 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_w> > > > wrote: > > > > > "Kumar" <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:26dbb8cc-24f7-4023-8221-cbcb84f80b59(a)k36g2000prb.googlegroups.com... > > > > On Mar 25, 9:26 pm, Uncle Ben <b...(a)greenba.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 21, 7:46 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 21, 3:26 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 21, 10:57 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mar 16, 9:34 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 16, 7:35 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > Newton's third law is frequently stated > > > > > > > > > > > "Action and reaction are equal and opposite > > > > > > > > > > To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" > > > > > > > > > > > Law is defined as; > > > > > > > > > > > The term law is often used to refer to universal principles > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > describe the fundamental nature of something, to universal > > > > > > > > > > properties > > > > > > > > > > and relationships between things, or to descriptions that > > > > > > > > > > purport to > > > > > > > > > > explain these principles and > > > > > > > > > > relationships.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_(principle) > > > > > > > > > > > I have some questions:- > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Is it also true that "to every reaction there is equal > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > opposite > > > > > > > > > > action"? > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Can we consider action or reaction as activities or > > > > > > > > > > motions > > > > > > > > > > and as > > > > > > > > > > law hold universal application, whether above action > > > > > > > > > > reaction > > > > > > > > > > relationship will apply to all our activities? > > > > > > > > > > > Best wishes. > > > > > > > > > > It applies to forces. Almost nothing else.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > Will you tell how equal & opposte effect relates to fundamental > > > > > > > > forces. I have discussed about EM. What about other three? > > > > > > > > > "The interaction of radiation with matter involves the > > > > > > > > absorption, > > > > > > > > scattering, and emission of photons". Does it not suggest that > > > > > > > > excitation of electrons related to just absorption & emission to > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > decaying back? > > > > > > > > --------------------- > > > > > > > for me the answer is very simple!! > > > > > > > 1 > > > > > > > it seesm to me that most people here still didnt got it that > > > > > > > nothing > > > > > > > is done instantaneously > > > > > > > iot means that > > > > > > > even that time is very short > > > > > > > it has > > > > > > > its beginning > > > > > > > its all the middle points > > > > > > > and its end!! > > > > > > > each of the above is different !!! > > > > > > > just immagine that you strech that tiny time > > > > > > > to a whole hour !! (:-) > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > an ypoint on that one hour is a different story: > > > > > > > the start point can be > > > > > > > either start of the process > > > > > > > or the end of it !!! > > > > > > > so that **start point ** can be > > > > > > > either the start of excitation > > > > > > > or the end of excitation!! -- > > > > > > > that leads to decay > > > > > > > > metaphorically > > > > > > > > you can START climbing a mountain (excitation) > > > > > > > and you can as well > > > > > > > > **start **descending a mountain !!!...(decay process ) > > > > > > > or vice versa ?? !! > > > > > > > ATB > > > > > > > Y.Porat > > > > > > > ------------------------------- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Yes but decay process only emit photons. Not so?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Kumar, decay processes can emit many things besides photons. > > > > > > You need to learn basic physics before trying to discus physics in > > > > > this newsgroup. Go to school!- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Pls tell me more about it or provide link. However we are discussing > > > > here about if decaying back can be considered as a reason to equal & > > > > opposite reaction. [Spritually, equal & opposte reaction can have some > > > > relavance to Causality-cause and effect or Karma theory] > > > > "Causality is the relationship between an event (the cause) and a > > > > second event (the effect), where the second event is a consequence of > > > > the first.["http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality > > > > > ============================================== > > > > Kumar, there is no problem with discussing physics here, that's a > > > > learning process too. Bonehead Green is a worthless bigot without any > > > > integrity and nobody's uncle. He doesn't have any integrity because he > > > > refuses to admit it when he's been proven wrong. He's no scientist, > > > > he's a dumb ex-schoolteacher. > > > > > You are correct that decay processes emit photons (packets of energy), > > > > although not "only" photons. > > > > Decaying "back" would require the photon returning and that doesn't > > > > happen too often in nuclear decay. However, in principle this is not as > > > > impossible as it may at first seem, many chemical reactions can be > > > > thought > > > > of as decay processes, with hydrogen and oxygen "emitting" water as well > > > > as heat. Some reactions are endothermic. > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endothermic > > > > There are 118 (to date) elements and it is commonly thought that most > > > > of these were produced from hydrogen in the core of a star which later > > > > exploded. Whatever the process, they do exist and if they contain energy > > > > as uranium does then that energy must have gone into the process.- Hide > > > > quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Thanks. However I am taliking about decaying back of electrons after > > > excitation due to some applied energy to atoms. Whether this also emit > > > other things than photons? > > > =============================================== > > > Not really, although the atom as a whole can be knocked around a bit. > > > The easiest way to understand quantum theory is to think of it in terms > > > of money. Let coins represent quantities of energy, and you have no > > > coins that have fractional values. If I give you 10 you can spend 10 or > > > spend 5, 3, 2 or spend 1 ten times, but you can never spend 4 or 6 or 7 > > > or 8 or 9. If you want to spend 4 then you must spend 1 four times, 2 > > > twice > > > or 3 and 1. Giving a photon to an atom (excitation) is like giving it a > > > coin. > > > Once it has the coin (energy) the only thing it can do is spend it or keep > > > it > > > for a rainy day, but it can spend part of the energy as long as it is an > > > allowed quantity. We know this from the spectrum, which is different > > > for each element. > > >http://www.physics.umd.edu/courses/Phys401/bedaque06/discrete_spectra.... > > > Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Thanks. Good example. It also cover corresponding elergy levels. > > However pls tell how atoms keep energy or remain in excitation for > > prolonged time? Is there a tendancy to decay back after excitation & > > come to their natural/lowest level? Regards. > > =============================================== > > Science is the observation, investigation and explanation of natural > > phenomena. Questions in the form of "how...?" or "why...?" based > > on your assumptions may have no answer, especially if your assumption > > is incorrect. How does the Moon stay in orbit around the Earth? Is > > there a tendency for it to fly off into space? Well, yes there is, and > > it stays in orbit because gravity keeps it there. So why doesn't it fall > > to Earth? Because it has a tendency to fly off into space! But we cannot > > say what gravity *is*, we can only say what it does. This is enough to > > enable us to launch artificial satellites into orbit, but not enough to > > say how gravity works. We have to accept that it does. So... what is a > > "prolonged time"? Why should there be a "natural/lowest" level? > > Perhaps the natural level is the highest level! Why should 2 be more > > than 1? How does a chicken lay eggs? Why do you get tears in your > > eyes when you are sad? Why do you laugh? (Think about it, it's a > > very silly thing to do, coughing up puffs of air to express pleasure.) > > Atoms keep energy for a prolonged time because they did NOT change. > > Tendencies are not certainties, they are instead a statistical measure of a > > change, there is no guarantee that tossing a coin will come up heads, > > but one expects it to happen for half of the number of trials IF it is > > tossed.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > By natural I mean an inherant sense or right & wrong. Anyway, what > cause electrons to decay back & come to lower level & leave photons? ------------------ fo r the similar reason why your cattle becomes colder with time Y.P ----------------
From: ben6993 on 27 Mar 2010 07:23 On Mar 27, 9:37 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: <snip for brevity> If I believed in the aether, which I don't necessarily, I could think of the light emitted almost as an earthquake wave after a land slip. With the slip being equivalent to the readjustment of the electron's position. As an earth slip occurs at the weakest point, so the point size electron is the first to give way. Then the wave (the photon) ripples through the space structure until it is eventually halted. But I don't know yet enough maths/physics to visualise that without the aether (or with the aether, either!). I used vaguely to think that the moving electron somehow, in itself, created the emission. Ie the motion of the electron charge being enough to create the necessary EM disturbance. But that was before I knew that the emission was instantaneous. But, with or without 'instantaneousness', there must be something causing the electron to move and the photon to emit. Just as there must be unseen pressure causing an earthslip in a particular place at a particular time. ----- In the coin analogy, I assume that if a shopkeeper doesn't have the right change in his till then he can't give you two 2ps or four 1ps, even though he may have 10ps and 5ps. I.e. the quanta are for ever immutable, even in the cash till, and not merely immutable while dressed up as photons? Also, if energy can be lessened (or increased) by change of frame, and there is no absolute frame of reference, are the changes in energy as viewed in different frames also quantised? I.e the difference in energy from one frame to the next is quantised? (It is interesting to find Androcles giving free physics lessons here. But I do understand there are no free lunches.)
From: Androcles on 27 Mar 2010 08:16 "Kumar" <lordshiva5753(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:5b344ff5-0493-4320-bb85-5c2dbb789302(a)v34g2000prm.googlegroups.com... On Mar 27, 12:07 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_x> wrote: > "Kumar" <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1a5325df-e2b4-411c-bfc9-cc0d06bdb883(a)k5g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 26, 2:14 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_w> wrote: > > > > > > > "Kumar" <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:1c8bb6cd-7803-4756-b179-dc542b0e2d28(a)a10g2000pri.googlegroups.com... > > On Mar 26, 12:27 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_w> > > wrote: > > > > "Kumar" <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >news:26dbb8cc-24f7-4023-8221-cbcb84f80b59(a)k36g2000prb.googlegroups.com... > > > On Mar 25, 9:26 pm, Uncle Ben <b...(a)greenba.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 21, 7:46 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 21, 3:26 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 21, 10:57 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 16, 9:34 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mar 16, 7:35 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > Newton's third law is frequently stated > > > > > > > > > > "Action and reaction are equal and opposite > > > > > > > > > To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" > > > > > > > > > > Law is defined as; > > > > > > > > > > The term law is often used to refer to universal > > > > > > > > > principles > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > describe the fundamental nature of something, to universal > > > > > > > > > properties > > > > > > > > > and relationships between things, or to descriptions that > > > > > > > > > purport to > > > > > > > > > explain these principles and > > > > > > > > > relationships.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_(principle) > > > > > > > > > > I have some questions:- > > > > > > > > > > 1. Is it also true that "to every reaction there is equal > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > opposite > > > > > > > > > action"? > > > > > > > > > > 2. Can we consider action or reaction as activities or > > > > > > > > > motions > > > > > > > > > and as > > > > > > > > > law hold universal application, whether above action > > > > > > > > > reaction > > > > > > > > > relationship will apply to all our activities? > > > > > > > > > > Best wishes. > > > > > > > > > It applies to forces. Almost nothing else.- Hide quoted > > > > > > > > text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > Will you tell how equal & opposte effect relates to > > > > > > > fundamental > > > > > > > forces. I have discussed about EM. What about other three? > > > > > > > > "The interaction of radiation with matter involves the > > > > > > > absorption, > > > > > > > scattering, and emission of photons". Does it not suggest that > > > > > > > excitation of electrons related to just absorption & emission > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > decaying back? > > > > > > > --------------------- > > > > > > for me the answer is very simple!! > > > > > > 1 > > > > > > it seesm to me that most people here still didnt got it that > > > > > > nothing > > > > > > is done instantaneously > > > > > > iot means that > > > > > > even that time is very short > > > > > > it has > > > > > > its beginning > > > > > > its all the middle points > > > > > > and its end!! > > > > > > each of the above is different !!! > > > > > > just immagine that you strech that tiny time > > > > > > to a whole hour !! (:-) > > > > > > so > > > > > > an ypoint on that one hour is a different story: > > > > > > the start point can be > > > > > > either start of the process > > > > > > or the end of it !!! > > > > > > so that **start point ** can be > > > > > > either the start of excitation > > > > > > or the end of excitation!! -- > > > > > > that leads to decay > > > > > > > metaphorically > > > > > > > you can START climbing a mountain (excitation) > > > > > > and you can as well > > > > > > > **start **descending a mountain !!!...(decay process ) > > > > > > or vice versa ?? !! > > > > > > ATB > > > > > > Y.Porat > > > > > > ------------------------------- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Yes but decay process only emit photons. Not so?- Hide quoted > > > > > text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Kumar, decay processes can emit many things besides photons. > > > > > You need to learn basic physics before trying to discus physics in > > > > this newsgroup. Go to school!- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Pls tell me more about it or provide link. However we are discussing > > > here about if decaying back can be considered as a reason to equal & > > > opposite reaction. [Spritually, equal & opposte reaction can have some > > > relavance to Causality-cause and effect or Karma theory] > > > "Causality is the relationship between an event (the cause) and a > > > second event (the effect), where the second event is a consequence of > > > the first.["http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality > > > > ============================================== > > > Kumar, there is no problem with discussing physics here, that's a > > > learning process too. Bonehead Green is a worthless bigot without any > > > integrity and nobody's uncle. He doesn't have any integrity because he > > > refuses to admit it when he's been proven wrong. He's no scientist, > > > he's a dumb ex-schoolteacher. > > > > You are correct that decay processes emit photons (packets of energy), > > > although not "only" photons. > > > Decaying "back" would require the photon returning and that doesn't > > > happen too often in nuclear decay. However, in principle this is not > > > as > > > impossible as it may at first seem, many chemical reactions can be > > > thought > > > of as decay processes, with hydrogen and oxygen "emitting" water as > > > well > > > as heat. Some reactions are endothermic. > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endothermic > > > There are 118 (to date) elements and it is commonly thought that most > > > of these were produced from hydrogen in the core of a star which later > > > exploded. Whatever the process, they do exist and if they contain > > > energy > > > as uranium does then that energy must have gone into the process.- > > > Hide > > > quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Thanks. However I am taliking about decaying back of electrons after > > excitation due to some applied energy to atoms. Whether this also emit > > other things than photons? > > =============================================== > > Not really, although the atom as a whole can be knocked around a bit. > > The easiest way to understand quantum theory is to think of it in terms > > of money. Let coins represent quantities of energy, and you have no > > coins that have fractional values. If I give you 10 you can spend 10 or > > spend 5, 3, 2 or spend 1 ten times, but you can never spend 4 or 6 or 7 > > or 8 or 9. If you want to spend 4 then you must spend 1 four times, 2 > > twice > > or 3 and 1. Giving a photon to an atom (excitation) is like giving it a > > coin. > > Once it has the coin (energy) the only thing it can do is spend it or > > keep > > it > > for a rainy day, but it can spend part of the energy as long as it is an > > allowed quantity. We know this from the spectrum, which is different > > for each element. > >http://www.physics.umd.edu/courses/Phys401/bedaque06/discrete_spectra... > > Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Thanks. Good example. It also cover corresponding elergy levels. > However pls tell how atoms keep energy or remain in excitation for > prolonged time? Is there a tendancy to decay back after excitation & > come to their natural/lowest level? Regards. > =============================================== > Science is the observation, investigation and explanation of natural > phenomena. Questions in the form of "how...?" or "why...?" based > on your assumptions may have no answer, especially if your assumption > is incorrect. How does the Moon stay in orbit around the Earth? Is > there a tendency for it to fly off into space? Well, yes there is, and > it stays in orbit because gravity keeps it there. So why doesn't it fall > to Earth? Because it has a tendency to fly off into space! But we cannot > say what gravity *is*, we can only say what it does. This is enough to > enable us to launch artificial satellites into orbit, but not enough to > say how gravity works. We have to accept that it does. So... what is a > "prolonged time"? Why should there be a "natural/lowest" level? > Perhaps the natural level is the highest level! Why should 2 be more > than 1? How does a chicken lay eggs? Why do you get tears in your > eyes when you are sad? Why do you laugh? (Think about it, it's a > very silly thing to do, coughing up puffs of air to express pleasure.) > Atoms keep energy for a prolonged time because they did NOT change. > Tendencies are not certainties, they are instead a statistical measure of > a > change, there is no guarantee that tossing a coin will come up heads, > but one expects it to happen for half of the number of trials IF it is > tossed.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - By natural I mean an inherant sense or right & wrong. Anyway, what cause electrons to decay back & come to lower level & leave photons? ================================================== Science is the observation, investigation and explanation of natural phenomena. Questions in the form of "how...?" or "why...?" based on your assumptions may have no answer, especially if your assumption is incorrect. Oh wait, I'm repeating...
From: Androcles on 27 Mar 2010 09:02
"ben6993" <ben6993(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:9a844ba6-fa2e-4013-951c-721be6c04f8c(a)g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... On Mar 27, 9:37 am, Kumar <lordshiva5...(a)gmail.com> wrote: <snip for brevity> If I believed in the aether, which I don't necessarily, I could think of the light emitted almost as an earthquake wave after a land slip. With the slip being equivalent to the readjustment of the electron's position. As an earth slip occurs at the weakest point, so the point size electron is the first to give way. Then the wave (the photon) ripples through the space structure until it is eventually halted. But I don't know yet enough maths/physics to visualise that without the aether (or with the aether, either!). =============================================== Before you can understand AC you need to understand DC. Here is a bar magnet and a compass needle. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/spin.gif Does it need any aether? =============================================== I used vaguely to think that the moving electron somehow, in itself, created the emission. Ie the motion of the electron charge being enough to create the necessary EM disturbance. But that was before I knew that the emission was instantaneous. But, with or without 'instantaneousness', there must be something causing the electron to move and the photon to emit. Just as there must be unseen pressure causing an earthslip in a particular place at a particular time. ----- In the coin analogy, I assume that if a shopkeeper doesn't have the right change in his till then he can't give you two 2ps or four 1ps, even though he may have 10ps and 5ps. I.e. the quanta are for ever immutable, even in the cash till, and not merely immutable while dressed up as photons? ============================================== In hypothetical sentences introduced by 'if' and referring to past time, where conditions are to be deemed 'unfulfilled', the verb will regularly be found in the pluperfect subjunctive, in both protasis and apodosis. -- Donet, "Principles of Elementary Latin Syntax" Hint: Your hypothetical question was introduced by "if". ============================================== Also, if energy can be lessened (or increased) by change of frame, and there is no absolute frame of reference, are the changes in energy as viewed in different frames also quantised? I.e the difference in energy from one frame to the next is quantised? =============================================== Look at the continuous spectrum. http://www.physics.umd.edu/courses/Phys401/bedaque06/discrete_spectra.jpg If you are only seeing the black lines what about all the colour that's emitted? You get spectral lines from a gas, but a solid such as tungsten in an incandescent light bulb emits a continuous (i.e. non quantized) spectrum. What's different? In a metal conducting electricity the atomic nuclei are swimming in a sea of electrons, whereas in a gas the electrons are bound to the nucleus and the atom as a whole is floating in nothing, bouncing off other atoms. You get spectral lines from mercury VAPOUR, and a continous spectrum from SOLID tungsten. Now... you can detect the velocity of a star by a Doppler shift in its quantised spectrum, but there is no visible shift in the continuous spectrum. http://www.astro.virginia.edu/class/oconnell/astr121/im/dopp-shifts-spectra.jpg The shift IS there, but the colour of an emission spectral line changes so that you cannot see it; colour and frequency are the same thing, a shift in frequency is a shift in colour. =============================================== (It is interesting to find Androcles giving free physics lessons here. But I do understand there are no free lunches.) ============================================== You can pay me if you like, I won't mind. You've probably got the wrong idea about me from the morons you've been listening too. Never judge a book by its cover. |