QUANTUM mechanics made simple !

[ChristineM]

Space is stationary , your use of static is incorrect and used for electricity .

An infinite void is a n-dimesnional volume of unnocupied space

Nope, space is not stationery, it is a volume containing hydrogen and helium plasma and electromagnetic radiation, magnetic fields, neutrinos, dust, and cosmic rays that is constantly moving because gravity sucks

Examine the definition of static used as an adjective and learn something
1/ lacking in movement, action, or change, especially in an undesirable or uninteresting way.
2/ concerned with bodies at rest or forces in equilibrium.

In this universe there is no unoccupied space, see my first sentence

 

[james blunt]

Nope, space is not stationery, it is a volume containing hydrogen and helium plasma and electromagnetic radiation, magnetic fields, neutrinos, dust, and cosmic rays that is constantly moving because gravity sucks

Examine the definition of static used as an adjective and learn something
1/ lacking in movement, action, or change, especially in an undesirable or uninteresting way.
2/ concerned with bodies at rest or forces in equilibrium.

In this universe there is no unoccupied space, see my first sentence

Which part do you not understand about , field matter and atomic matter are independent of the void ? QUANTUM entanglement does not involve space , pfffffff

Delta k = 0 is constant , absolute , unchanging , an axiom.

 

[ChristineM]

Which part do you not understand about , field matter and atomic matter are independent of the void ? QUANTUM entanglement does not involve space , pfffffff

Delta k = 0 is constant , absolute , unchanging , an axiom.

What void, a field is not matter but energy.

You are the one who brought up space

And you are the one introducing the straw man of quantum entanglement

I will repeat delta k = w... w is only 0 in a static (adjective) environment

Which part do you not understand about real life? If you want to make up bull to massage your ego them feel free but please do not try teaching it as though it means more than your imagination.

 

[james blunt]

What void, a field is not matter but energy.

You are the one who brought up space

And you are the one introducing the straw man of quantum entanglement

I will repeat delta k = w... w is only 0 in a static (adjective) environment

Which part do you not understand about real life? If you want to make up bull to massage your ego them feel free but please do not try teaching it as though it means more than your imagination.

I guess you are not interested in learning real science ?

Do you even have a first CLUE of what field mass is ?

I suppose you think field matter such as light is massless?

 

[Polymath257]

QM is the study of the sub atomic, not the atomic.

Peoples views are not necessarily education

Not true. For example, QM is used to analyze atomic orbitals and also the hybridization of molecular orbitals and is quite useful in both regards. In fact, I would say that QM is more often used in solid state physics to understand the bulk properties of solids than it is for subatomic physics. But that is simply because more people study solid state physics than particle physics.

QM deals with *far* more than the subatomic realm.

 

[ChristineM]

I guess you are not interested in learning real science ?

Do you even have a first CLUE of what field mass is ?

I suppose you think field matter such as light is massless?

I am very interested in science which is why find your self delusion quite horrific. And the fact you are offering it as education to be an obnoxious affront to the thinking mind.

Do you have a clue what a field is or what mass is?

Photons (light) are massless. They have energy and momentum but no mass.

 

[Polymath257]

I guess you are not interested in learning real science ?

Do you even have a first CLUE of what field mass is ?

I suppose you think field matter such as light is massless?

OK, that just broke my super-deluxe irony meter.

 

[ChristineM]

Not true. For example, QM is used to analyze atomic orbitals and also the hybridization of molecular orbitals and is quite useful in both regards. In fact, I would say that QM is more often used in solid state physics to understand the bulk properties of solids than it is for subatomic physics. But that is simply because more people study solid state physics than particle physics.

QM deals with *far* more than the subatomic realm.

I see the atomic as composed of atoms. Atoms comprise of quantum elements/energy levels but as a whole are not quantum. QM is the study of sub atomic and fields it can be defined as : the branch of mechanics that deals with the mathematical description of the motion and interaction of subatomic particles, incorporating the concepts of quantization of energy, wave–particle duality, the uncertainty principle, and the correspondence principle.
quantum mechanics | Definition of quantum mechanics in English by Oxford Dictionaries

 

[Polymath257]

I see the atomic as composed of atoms. Atoms comprise of quantum elements/energy levels but as a whole are not quantum. QM is the study of sub atomic and fields it can be defined as : the branch of mechanics that deals with the mathematical description of the motion and interaction of subatomic particles, incorporating the concepts of quantization of energy, wave–particle duality, the uncertainty principle, and the correspondence principle.
quantum mechanics | Definition of quantum mechanics in English by Oxford Dictionaries

Right, but in practice it is used to describe, for example, bonding in molecules and the macroscopic properties of solids. It is impossible to do modern solid state physics without quantum mechanics. For that matter, much of statistical mechanics is also impossible without QM.

To say it *only* deals with the subatomic realm is simply false. Now, it explains that larger scale phenomena in terms of the interactions of the subatomic particles (primarily nuclei and electrons for both solid state and stat. mech.), but it most certainly goes well beyond the subatomic level.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not true. For example, QM is used to analyze atomic orbitals and also the hybridization of molecular orbitals and is quite useful in both regards. In fact, I would say that QM is more often used in solid state physics to understand the bulk properties of solids than it is for subatomic physics. But that is simply because more people study solid state physics than particle physics.

QM deals with *far* more than the subatomic realm.

I was aware of "bulk" phenomena, but in starting some reading
which would let me sound intelligent, it looked like too much
work....& too great a risk that I'd have to put my dunce cap back on.

 

[Skwim]

The discussion has only just begun !This is the fundamentals of matters binary energies.

Atomic matter : electrical charge A + electrical charge B = electrical charge neutral

Field matter : electrical charge A + electrical charge B = electrical charge neutral

Field matter²: Vikings charge A + Patriots charge B = ten yard penalty: illegal charging. Patriots

Debit matter: Discover charge A + Visa charge B = overdrawn charge

.

 

[ratiocinator]

Atoms comprise of quantum elements/energy levels but as a whole are not quantum.

You can do the classic double-slit experiment with atoms, and even molecules. See: Double-slit experiment - Interference of individual particles.

 

[james blunt]

You can do the classic double-slit experiment with atoms, and even molecules. See: Double-slit experiment - Interference of individual particles.

Well, you could if you didn't wanted to add some observer affect to the natural nature of light . Light does not generally travel through angled slits unless somebody makes an affect and calls it a good experiment .

 

[james blunt]

Atomic matter : electrical charge A + electrical charge B = electrical charge neutral

Field matter : electrical charge A + electrical charge B = electrical charge neutral

Field matter²: Vikings charge A + Patriots charge B = ten yard penalty: illegal charging. Patriots

Debit matter: Discover charge A + Visa charge B = overdrawn charge

.

Nada a deer with no eye , you arranged in the wrong order , it's like airy on here .

 

[exchemist]

Right, but in practice it is used to describe, for example, bonding in molecules and the macroscopic properties of solids. It is impossible to do modern solid state physics without quantum mechanics. For that matter, much of statistical mechanics is also impossible without QM.

To say it *only* deals with the subatomic realm is simply false. Now, it explains that larger scale phenomena in terms of the interactions of the subatomic particles (primarily nuclei and electrons for both solid state and stat. mech.), but it most certainly goes well beyond the subatomic level.

Indeed. I would go further. Almost the whole of modern chemistry depends on quantum mechanics and its concepts.

As you say, chemical bonding, whether covalent, ionic or metallic, or hydrogen bonding or even intermolecular "Van der Waals" forces cannot be understood without it. The structure of the Periodic Table itself follows directly from QM (Aufbauprinzip, Pauli Exclusion Principle etc) and the detailed properties of the elements are accounted for in terms of QM effects, such as patterns in ionisation energy, orbital penetration and shielding etc. Atomic and molecular spectroscopy, and techniques such as NMR, EPR, Raman etc are 100% QM of course. Not to mention photochemistry......(By the way rotational and vibrational spectra are good examples of how whole molecules are subject to quantum effects.)

As a chemistry undergraduate in the 1970s, I would not have lasted 5 minutes without an understanding of quantum theory. It is true that most undergrads could get by without doing all the maths explicitly, but the principles and major results were fundamental.

 

[ecco]

What about the negative energy field equation of
A = -0.5q
B= 0.5q
A + B = 0q
My equation

Will the inclusion of parentheses confuse you?
A = -0.5q
B = 0.5q
B - ( A ) = ?

Lol it's 0 also but you going say it's ten

It's not 0. It's not 10. You haven't just failed basic algebra, you've also failed basic arithmetic.

It's no wonder that you believe you can make quantum-mechanics-simple.

 

[ecco]

(And a tip'o the hat to Star Trek.)

This hat?

 

[Revoltingest]

This hat?

Sure, why not!

 

[james blunt]

It's not 0. It's not 10. You haven't just failed basic algebra, you've also failed basic arithmetic.

It's no wonder that you believe you can make quantum-mechanics-simple.

You Do not know why the answer is 0 , I do.

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑
It's not 0. It's not 10. You haven't just failed basic algebra, you've also failed basic arithmetic.

It's no wonder that you believe you can make quantum-mechanics-simple.​

You Do not know why the answer is 0 , I do.

I do not know why the answer is 0 any more than I know why the earth is flat. That's because the answer is not 0 and the earth is not flat.

I do know why you believe the answer is 0. However, forum etiquette prevents me from actually stating it.