New Physics Based on Yoon's Universal Atomic Model

newedana wrote:

"Dr. Photon" wrote in message:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...eb1d1c0689b604

"newedana" wrote in message groups.com...
Physics Revolution seems to have already occurred, but in a
different
way:
[snip]

Does Yoon's atomic model agree with following two experiments:

4d orbitals
http://cbed.mse.uiuc.edu/images/cu2o.gif

N2 bonding orbital (half way down at)
http://cibernautes.com/didaclopez/944/2670/
figure caption I think approximately translates as
" One of the images obtained by the group of Villeneuve, which
shows
the molecular orbital around the exterior of molecular N2, which
includes an amplitude region that encompasses both atoms and which
is
uniquely determined. The images obtained coincide with the
theoretical
models of the molecular orbital of diatomic nitrogen."


You'll find more about Yoon's Universal Atomic Model and New Natural
Science from http://www.yoonsatom.net

I read it already.

The point of my post was to try to get you say yes or no.

My opinion is definitely "NO!", hence in my opinion Yoon's model is
falsified.

What is your opinion?

I also found other orbital measurements such as

*loads* of stuff on "electron momentum spectroscopy" (Google this),
for example
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/c...07032/PDFSTART
and
http://www.users.csbsju.edu/~frioux/momentum.pdf

and Google "photoelectron angular distribution", see for example
http://swpx28.sw.ehu.es/ricardo/papers/jpb_rdm02.pdf

and Google "photoelectron angular distribution fixed-in-space", for
example
http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/0953-4...104/b301l4.pdf

and you can even time resolve them, for example
http://www.clf.rl.ac.uk/Reports/1998-1999/pdf/45.pdf

All of the above agree with (and imply) the QM description of
orbitals, as evaluated by the Schroedinger eqn.

I ask again, does Yoon's model agree with any of that?

BR