Why Don’t The Electrons Fall To The Nucleus/Why Doesn’t The Nucleus Blow Itself Apart.

All mainstream views of physics would have it that the atom consists of (relatively) tightly packed  Protons and Neutrons in the nucleus of the atom.  The Protons are held to be 1840 or so times as massive as the electrons and they are held to be positively charged. The Neutrons are just a little bit heavier then that. Any kid can see that the Neutron, under the above wrong theory, ought to be merely an electron and a proton combined to form one entity. But oddly enough this is strenuously denied, for no real reason but never mind. 

It is not possible to deny that this is the mainstream view of the PHYSICAL STRUCTURE of the atom without giving an alternative view. Now I was won over with unstoppable international phenomenon, Bill Gaedas alternative view. Particularly as it is market-tested. In his view the electrons are big fat things that engulf the atom in a similiar way to some of those Molecular Model Sets that the oldtime chemists used to use.

 

These sort of “macrami sets” as it were, had genuine and real  predictive power. Some of them were of the sort where if you could fit them together you could predict that the molecule was a viable molecule. I shit you not. These things were marvellous. They were a valid research tool still in the days of black and white TV. I don’t know where things stand as now. 

 

Now when we say the nucleus is tightly packed in the mainstream model we only mean so in relation to the alleged volumeous nothing that the electrons fly around in. 

Unscientist Ian Fisk attempted to bullshit me that this above model is NOT the mainstream model. This is a lie. It is in fact the mainstream model of the atom. And I can prove it. The mainstreamers will not PHYSICALLY DESCRIBE an alternative.  They will say all sorts of crap but none of it being an alternative PHYSICAL model of the atom that the mainstream will all get behind. 

Now this is the mainstream model. And anyone who pretends otherwise is lying. But nonetheless I’m happy to be given an alternative PHYSICAL model of the atom and then you might try and convince me that it is a mainstream model. Thats not going to happen. Since the mainstream model is as described above. And anyone saying otherwise is lying and will likely refuse to describe an alternative physicality to the atom as I’ve described it. 

 

It doesn’t matter what you say about the atom that is NON-PHYSICAL. That cannot change the fact that the mainstream model is as I’ve described. Only proving that I’ve described its physical character incorrectly is relevant here. 

I’ll give you an example of a non-physical shitrain of crap that was used to try and show that my rendering of the mainstream model is wrong:

“An atomic orbital is a mathematical function that describes the wave-like behavior of an electron in an atom. This function can be used to calculate the probability of finding any electron of an atom in any specific region around the atom’s nucleus. The term “orbital” has become known as either the “mathematical function” or the “region” generated with the function.[1] Specifically, atomic orbitals are the possible quantum states of an individual electron in the electron cloud around a single atom, as described by the function.

The idea that electrons moved in an orbit-like way inside an atom, was first suggested in 1904. From about 1913 to 1926 the electrons were thought to orbit the atomic nucleus much like the planets around the Sun. Explaining the behavior of the electron “orbits” was one of the driving forces behind the development of quantum mechanics. In quantum mechanics, atomic orbitals are described as wave functions over space, indexed by the n, l, and m quantum numbers of the orbital or by the names as used in electron configurations, as shown on the right. As electrons cannot be described as solid particles (like a planet), a more accurate analogy to the electron would be that of a large and often oddly-shaped atmosphere, the electron, distributed around a relatively tiny planet, which is the atomic nucleus. Because of the difference from classical mechanical orbits, the term “orbit” for electrons in atoms, has been replaced with the term orbital.

The orbital names (s, p, d, f) are derived from the characteristics of their spectroscopic lines: sharp, principal, diffuse, and fundamental, the rest being named in alphabetical order….”

 

Now I challenge any of you to show how this is a PHYSICAL description that differs from mine. It doesn’t differ. It doesn’t show that I have it wrong. Because its not a physical description.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

OK. So now that I’ve proved that I have the mainstreams model of the atom correct I shall now prove that it is wrong. And that Gadea’s  model is more likely to be closer to the truth.

You see the mainstream model is untenable. In that the positively charged nucleus would blow itself apart, and if it didn’t the electrons would all wind up falling into the nucleus. Not necessarily their own but nucleus’ all around them.

 

 

 

We are still stuck with the same physical model. But now the dumb bastards have taken matters mystical, non-physical and formless. See Ian Fisks bullshit jibber-jabber above.  So the idea is not to stop talking about the reality of how the atom is structured and start jabbering away about probability and other voodoo. The idea is to go back and figure out what its actual structure is. 

Now here are some silocon atoms in array. Look at the triangles. Where are the moving electrons? Where is all this dead space? Where is the dense inner core?  For that matter does this look like a bunch of wave functions and probability clouds? 

Chemistry is sound. Organic chemistry is righteous. But  modern non-commercial physics is just a crock. So lets get the mainstreamers to just admit they were wrong and start again. 

If you wish to see the Fisk filibuster on the other threads well fine. Be aware that I wiped a lot of his stuff because I didn’t want him creating a wall of sound that would confuse people. Naturally I’m still interested in his alternative PHYSICAL model of the atom that he reckons is mainstream. But he’s not going to hand it over because he’s bullshitting.