photons and reflection
in [Basics]
|
Prev: Question about common-collector circuits.
Next: Absolutly Free Lectures on C++ by MIT Studied Professor
From: BURT on 10 Dec 2009 14:40 A mirror is an example that dispoves quantum mechanics. The reflection is absorption and emmision taking place accross all visual frequencies. Quantum mechanics is wrong about quantization of energy levels for a mirror's atoms. It doesn't work. The broader truth is not quantization and quantum mechanics needs to be corrected. Mitch Raemsch
From: Louis Boyd on 10 Dec 2009 17:35 BURT wrote: > A mirror is an example that dispoves quantum mechanics. The reflection > is absorption and emmision taking place accross all visual > frequencies. Quantum mechanics is wrong about quantization of energy > levels for a mirror's atoms. It doesn't work. The broader truth is not > quantization and quantum mechanics needs to be corrected. > Misapplying a theory to an observation then claiming you've disproved the theory is just silly. Quantum mechanics is useful. QM is useful when describing the interaction of light and matter at a sub molecular level If QM was expanded to explain all wave phenomena it would be too cumbersome to use. What's so difficult about just applying wave and QM when they're needed? Most people never need either theory. You can sit on a couch and watch football games on TV without any knowledge of either theory. Theories are simply tools. If a hammer works and a screwdriver doesn't then use the hammer. You could make a tool with a hammer on one end an a screwdriver on the other but it wouldn't be as useful as two separate tools.
From: Jamie on 10 Dec 2009 19:10 BURT wrote: > On Dec 9, 2:57 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>On Dec 9, 3:34 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>On Dec 8, 8:26 pm, Skywise <i...(a)oblivion.nothing.com> wrote: >> >>>>BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in news:8b79ee65-5af0-44a2-bf00- >>>>a67ed367a...(a)2g2000prl.googlegroups.com: >> >>>>>The truth is meant to be known. Quantization is the lesser concept >>>>>than full ranges of energy. >> >>>>So then, what is the truth? If quantization is 'less correct', then >>>>what is 'more correct'. If you're going to tell us we're wrong, then >>>>tell us what's right. We're listening. >> >>>>Brian >>>>--http://www.skywise711.com-Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism >>>>Seismic FAQ:http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html >>>>Quake "predictions":http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html >>>>Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes? >> >>>Quantization only applies to stimulated emmision. >> >>Oh dear. >> >> >> >> >>>Opaque objects have to absorb all frequencies. >> >>>Quantum Mechanics is wrong. >> >>>Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text - > > > Perhaps you have something to say? > > Mitch Raemsch :->
From: BURT on 10 Dec 2009 21:03 On Dec 10, 2:35 pm, Louis Boyd <b...(a)apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote: > BURT wrote: > > A mirror is an example that dispoves quantum mechanics. The reflection > > is absorption and emmision taking place accross all visual > > frequencies. Quantum mechanics is wrong about quantization of energy > > levels for a mirror's atoms. It doesn't work. The broader truth is not > > quantization and quantum mechanics needs to be corrected. > > Misapplying a theory to an observation then claiming you've disproved > the theory is just silly. Quantum mechanics is useful. QM is useful > when describing the interaction of light and matter at a sub molecular > level If QM was expanded to explain all wave phenomena it would be too > cumbersome to use. What's so difficult about just applying wave and QM > when they're needed? Most people never need either theory. You can sit > on a couch and watch football games on TV without any knowledge of > either theory. Theories are simply tools. If a hammer works and a > screwdriver doesn't then use the hammer. You could make a tool with a > hammer on one end an a screwdriver on the other but it wouldn't be as > useful as two separate tools. Einstein said that Quantum Mechanics was wrong because God did not play dice with the universe. Evidently it is also wrong for a mirror. Mitch Raemsch
From: whit3rd on 10 Dec 2009 21:11
On Dec 10, 11:40 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > A mirror is an example that dispoves quantum mechanics. The reflection > is absorption and emmision taking place accross all visual > frequencies. Quantum mechanics is wrong about quantization of energy > levels for a mirror's atoms. It doesn't work. The mirror reflects only if the light incoming is under the plasma frequency of the free electrons in the metallic reflector layer (there are other reflection mechanisms for nonmetals). The reflection is equal to the incoming light, so there is NO 'transition' between energy states required in any particle. No absorption. No emission. The metallic bonding of the atoms in the mirror's silver layer acts to free the electrons from those atomic energy-level rules, in this case. You can't make a normal mirror from un-attached atoms (gases) because the electrons are bound and not free. |