Apart from the worst challenge ever. Which should really have gone "to show how dangerous real medicine is let's all take an overdose and see what happens". We get some weird physics as well.
"at the level of its subatomic particles and so-called "orbiting electrons" which aren't even orbiting in the first place. Electrons are vibrations and not physical objects.
But, oh yeah, I forgot. The skeptics don't know that yet."
Well actually it's scientists who have known this for 100 years. Dirac won the Nobel Prize in 1933 for solving the field equation for the electron and at the same time positing the existence of the positron.
"That won't be taught that in university physics classes until probably 2020"
Totally wrong, it's been taught at university for many decades.
"For now, they've all convinced themselves that electrons are -- get this -- tiny "particles" flying around atomic nuclei and tremendous speeds which just happen to stay in their little orbits like little perpetual motion machines (which they say are impossible), until all of a sudden, these electron "particles" inexplicably leap to a higher or lower orbit without occupying the space in-between those orbits at any moment."
Well we've known for a couple of hundred years that they are not tiny particles flying around nuclei, if they were they would emit synchrotron radiation and decay. Yes, they really DO leap from one energy level to another without occupying any states in between - it's called Quantum Mechanics and was sorted at the Solvey conference 1927.
All this was found in http://www.naturalnews.com/031297_homeopathy_overdose.html
Questions:
Are alt medders as ignorant about all science as they are about medicine?
Is it deliberate that they just misrepresent everything?
It's almost as bad as a Poe, but I think they seriously believe it all.
Very nice Hart. What has any of that got to do with my question? As for "water has memory " that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed just as easily.
"MOST people (including the vast majority of scientists in general) do not have a complete, thorough grasp of theoretical physics"
No-one is expecting a though understanding of physics. Sometime mid 20th century would do just fine.
"as the early 1990's we WERE still being taught that electrons were particles" Probably because they can be. "If you recall, at the time their orbits were understood as 2 dimensional," Never! Unless your understanding of 2 dimensional is different to everyone elses.
"It was only a few years later that our understanding of "matter" changed dramatically." A few years AFTER 1935 maybe, a few years after 1990 not true at all. We were doing QM at school when I was 15 in 1977. Sue your teachers if your college didn't catch up with 1935 even in 1990.
Hey Tink chilling out to cool Dylan here
I work with strange people who gave up on the grind-stone and decided to work in social settings such as call centres and in social networks with physics degrees. Physics is hard. Yet here we have a self-proclaimed doctor claiming she was taught that atoms orbited a nucleus in 2D in 1990 - I don't believe her - unless she was home schooled. Rutherford figured it out 100 years ago.
"do not have a complete, thorough grasp of theoretical physics. Actually... I'd venture that most theoretical physicists would say their grasp of the material is tenuous" See what we're up against, she believes theoretical physicists only have a tenuous grasp of their own subject. She might be right, I feel I only have a tenuous grasp on my specialism (an obscure branch of maths) but that is bleeding edge science. Every scientist on the bleeding edge only has a tenuous grasp of the subject, yet it's made to be a negative thing by non-scientists.
The article I quoted
"at the level of its subatomic particles and so-called "orbiting electrons" which aren't even orbiting in the first place. Electrons are vibrations and not physical objects.
But, oh yeah, I forgot. The skeptics don't know that yet."
Well actually it's scientists who have known this for 100 years. Dirac won the Nobel Prize in 1933 for solving the field equation for the electron and at the same time positing the existence of the positron.
"That won't be taught that in university physics classes until probably 2020"
Totally wrong, it's been taught at university for many decades.
"For now, they've all convinced themselves that electrons are -- get this -- tiny "particles" flying around atomic nuclei and tremendous speeds which just happen to stay in their little orbits like little perpetual motion machines (which they say are impossible), until all of a sudden, these electron "particles" inexplicably leap to a higher or lower orbit without occupying the space in-between those orbits at any moment."
Well we've known for a couple of hundred years that they are not tiny particles flying around nuclei, if they were they would emit synchrotron radiation and decay. Yes, they really DO leap from one energy level to another without occupying any states in between - it's called Quantum Mechanics and was sorted at the Solvey conference 1927.
All this was found in http://www.naturalnews.com/031297_homeopathy_overdose.html
Questions:
Are alt medders as ignorant about all science as they are about medicine?
Is it deliberate that they just misrepresent everything?
It's almost as bad as a Poe, but I think they seriously believe it all.
Very nice Hart. What has any of that got to do with my question? As for "water has memory " that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed just as easily.
"MOST people (including the vast majority of scientists in general) do not have a complete, thorough grasp of theoretical physics"
No-one is expecting a though understanding of physics. Sometime mid 20th century would do just fine.
"as the early 1990's we WERE still being taught that electrons were particles" Probably because they can be. "If you recall, at the time their orbits were understood as 2 dimensional," Never! Unless your understanding of 2 dimensional is different to everyone elses.
"It was only a few years later that our understanding of "matter" changed dramatically." A few years AFTER 1935 maybe, a few years after 1990 not true at all. We were doing QM at school when I was 15 in 1977. Sue your teachers if your college didn't catch up with 1935 even in 1990.
Hey Tink chilling out to cool Dylan here
I work with strange people who gave up on the grind-stone and decided to work in social settings such as call centres and in social networks with physics degrees. Physics is hard. Yet here we have a self-proclaimed doctor claiming she was taught that atoms orbited a nucleus in 2D in 1990 - I don't believe her - unless she was home schooled. Rutherford figured it out 100 years ago.
"do not have a complete, thorough grasp of theoretical physics. Actually... I'd venture that most theoretical physicists would say their grasp of the material is tenuous" See what we're up against, she believes theoretical physicists only have a tenuous grasp of their own subject. She might be right, I feel I only have a tenuous grasp on my specialism (an obscure branch of maths) but that is bleeding edge science. Every scientist on the bleeding edge only has a tenuous grasp of the subject, yet it's made to be a negative thing by non-scientists.
The article I quoted