newedana wrote:
Your quantum physicists do not know in reality how can the orbital
electron of atoms generate electromagnetic waves with wavelengths
ranging from gammer rays to microwaves.

1) The word is "gamma". You make that error persisently.
2) I don't know what you mean with "orbital electron".
3) No one claims that electrons in atoms can generate gamma rays. The
best one can get from them are x-rays.
4) The generation of all these types of radiation is very well
understood. Thousands of theoretical and experimental studies are done
on that every single year. I know of no discrepancy between theory and
experiment.


You better read Dr.Yoon's text.

Present some quantitative results of him and the derivations leading
to them instead of mere rhetoric, then I'll think about this.


You will find how beautifully he could explain the mechanism of
generating such electromaghetic waves with a variety of wavelengths by
atoms.

Is this "explanation" on the same level of vagueness and contains as
many unsupported assertions and falsehoods as his "explanation" of
diffraction?


The mechanism is exactly the same as that of generating radio
waves with a RC resonant circuit.

Can he explain the observations *quantitatively* with his model?


Perhaps you will find that how
scientific is his explanation.

Science is about explaining observations quantitatively. Can he do
that, or can't he? How long will you evade this question?


You admit that gammer rays, x-rays, Uv,
visible lights infrared, micro waves and radio waves are all included
in the same family of electromagnetic energy waves.

Drop the "energy" in the last term, then this makes sense.


So they should have
the same mechanism of generating them by orbital electrons, right?

Non sequitur.


Then have you ever heard such a science decribing the mechanism of
generating a variety of electromagnetic wave by atoms?

Yes. It's called atomic and nuclear physics.


But, perhaps you
may have no doubt, microwaves constructing proton NMR( nuclear magnetic
resonance) spectrum are generated by protons magnetically resonated by
field magnetism, because QM theory says so.

No, because observations says so.


But according to Dr. Yoon's
science it is a big mistate!

If he can explain the observations *quantitatively* with his model, he
is free to show his work. So far, you have shown merely rhetoric from him.


I am sure you would say, how on earth did
Yoon manage to obtain a PhD.

Yes, I wonder that a bit. But I've also already seen other brilliant
experimental scientists with little clue of theory...


He apparenty knows less than many layman crackpots.

I don't know how much he knows in his field of expertise (experimental
physical chemistry, apparently). But obviously he doesn't know much
outside of that field of expertise.


However Dr. Yoon says in his book, quantum mechanical
interpretation of emitting NMR is one of the biggest lie in the history
of human science.

How lies, specifically?

And why do the observations agree so nicely with the theoretical
predictions?


The signal of NMR spectrum has nothing to do with
proton's magnetic resonance. It also comes from the orbital electron
ring of hydrogen atom.

If he can explain the observations *quantitatively* with his model, he
is free to show his work. So far, you have shown merely rhetoric from him.



QM physicists are quite ignorant as to the
dimension of proton, compared with a hydrogen atom.

Wrong.


It has merely 1/10^15 of hydrogen atom.

Volume?


Do you know how large is the dimension of
microwave's wavelength? It is 0,1mm to 10 dm. really huge compared to
the dimension of proton.

Indeed.


In the standard text, hydrogen atom can
generate electromagnetic waves with wavlength of maximum 1,23 micron.
So such a tiny sized proton can never generate microwaves with such a
huge wavelengths.

Non sequitur. Since when does the size of the emitter determine the
wavelength of the emitted wave?

[snip repetitions]


Bye,
Bjoern