New Physics Based on Yoon's Universal Atomic Model

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

"newedana" wrote in message
roups.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

Dr. Hansik Yoon proposes a very innovative atomic model, Yoon's
Universal Atomic Model, in his book titled "Natural Science Founded on
A New Atomic Model". --- http://www.yoonsatom.net

This book seems to be one of the most innovative and comprehensive
natural science books published in decades. This new atomic model
replaces the Bohr's atomic model and quantum oscillator. The new atomic

model has tiny persistent current ring named as the orbital electron
ring around its nucleus. This kind of persistent current is seen from a

superconductor.

Dr. Yoon's natural science does not rely on the relativity theory and
quantum mechanics. It has totally different atomic model and paradigm
from other existing theories.

Dr. Yoon's natural science seems to satisfactorily explain many
physical phenomena disputed long time among scientists without
inconsistency.

Dr. Yoon in his book deals with a wide range of subjects such as
electron, orbital electron ring, atomic structure, nature of light,
flaws of the dualism of wave-particle, speed of light, real mechanism
of the refraction and diffraction of light, real mechanism of nuclear
fission and fusion, superconductivity, NMR and IR spectrums, laser
light, X-rays, structure of water, gel crystal, organic carbon
compounds, new mechanism of enzymatic reaction, bio-polymers, metallic
crystal, origin of elements, cosmology, and etc. What a broad scope!

Dr. Yoon asserts that the light and energy which are intrinsically
continuous entities can not be satisfactorily described by photons and
quanta which are discontinuous entities. And the dualism of
wave-particle has big flaw in it. He also boldly asserts in his book
that the refraction of light is not due to the speed difference of
lights propagating in different material systems with different
densities, quite contrary to what we have learned.

We can read some part of the book from http://www.yoonsatom.net

In article . com,
"newedana" wrote:
I found that Dr. Hansik Yoon clearly explained the Diffraction
Mechanism of Electrons (or Double Slit Experiment, if you like) and
relevant subjects from his new atomic model's viewpoint in the
following contents.

You found? LOL!


So, he effectively disproved the wave-particle dualism and the
relativity theory as well as quantum mechanics.

You are an idiot.


Part II. The Energy World
Chapter 1. Dualism of Wave-Corpuscle
1)Louis de Broglei's Electron
2)How can Moving Electron have a Wave Character
3)Diffraction Mechanism of Charged Particles
4)Energy Dumping by Charged Particles Accelerated
5)Mass Body Never Reduces its Absolute Mass

Dr. Yoon clearly explained the diffraction mechanism of charged
particles(electrons) like that:

It's not clear and it's not an explanation.


Because the charged particles perform a longitudinal oscillation when
accelerated, they construct alternative layers of wave phases
constructed with faster and slower speeds. When collimated electrons
move in parallel and pass through narrow spacing of crystal lattice,
they turn out to build numerous spherical waves between which the phase
interference takes place.

In the case of destructive interference between different speed wave
phases make charged particles deflect by right angles. In the case of
constructive wave phase interference, charged particles can proceed
forward in straight with integrated faster and slower speed. Thus the
charged particles can build a diffraction pattern as X-ray does as they
pass through the crystal lattice. In short, the mechanism of forming
spherical wave fronts by accelerated charged particles is that when
their plane wave fronts pass through optical apertures they turn out to
be slitted into numerous tiny beams of particle flow.

Magnetic fluxes induced by these accelerated charged particles result
to bind their shifted electric force fluxes. Spherical wave fronts are
thus made possible from accelerated charged particles when their plane
wave fronts pass through crystal lattices.

So, while the charged particles keep their speed in constant, the
orientation angle of electric fluxes does not change due to a balance
between the electric repulsion between individual electric force fluxes
and the binding force of self-induced magnetic force fluxes.


I also found that Dr. Yoon explained the X-Ray Diffraction mechanism
from his new atomic model's viewpoint at other part of his book. You
can see the following statement from the preface of the book
(http://www.yoonsatom.net).

"....... How can X-Rays and Gamma-Rays have corpuscular character as
they propagate through the space? It is due to the reason these rays
with the shortest wavelengths are emitted from the innermost electron
rings of atoms of inside layers building material systems, so they have
to build diffraction beams, as they pass through material systems. In
contrast, visible lights are emitted from material surface, so they
decrease their intensity uniformly obeying the inverse square distance
rule, as they propagate through the space. That is why X-Rays and
Gamma-rays behave like corpuscles. ......"


Dr. Hansik Yoon also explained the diffraction of Light as well as
refraction of Light, stating that the refraction of light is NOT due to
the speed difference of lights propagating in different material
systems with different densities.

Dr. Yoon might as well say it's magic; it would make as much scientific
sense as the above.

I found that Dr. Hansik Yoon clearly explained the Diffraction
Mechanism of Electrons (or Double Slit Experiment, if you like) and
relevant subjects from his new atomic model's viewpoint in the
following contents.

So, he effectively disproved the wave-particle dualism and the
relativity theory as well as quantum mechanics.

Part II. The Energy World
Chapter 1. Dualism of Wave-Corpuscle
1)Louis de Broglei's Electron
2)How can Moving Electron have a Wave Character
3)Diffraction Mechanism of Charged Particles
4)Energy Dumping by Charged Particles Accelerated
5)Mass Body Never Reduces its Absolute Mass

Dr. Yoon clearly explained the diffraction mechanism of charged
particles(electrons) like that:

Because the charged particles perform a longitudinal oscillation when
accelerated, they construct alternative layers of wave phases
constructed with faster and slower speeds. When collimated electrons
move in parallel and pass through narrow spacing of crystal lattice,
they turn out to build numerous spherical waves between which the phase
interference takes place.

In the case of destructive interference between different speed wave
phases make charged particles deflect by right angles. In the case of
constructive wave phase interference, charged particles can proceed
forward in straight with integrated faster and slower speed. Thus the
charged particles can build a diffraction pattern as X-ray does as they
pass through the crystal lattice. In short, the mechanism of forming
spherical wave fronts by accelerated charged particles is that when
their plane wave fronts pass through optical apertures they turn out to
be slitted into numerous tiny beams of particle flow.

Magnetic fluxes induced by these accelerated charged particles result
to bind their shifted electric force fluxes. Spherical wave fronts are
thus made possible from accelerated charged particles when their plane
wave fronts pass through crystal lattices.

So, while the charged particles keep their speed in constant, the
orientation angle of electric fluxes does not change due to a balance
between the electric repulsion between individual electric force fluxes
and the binding force of self-induced magnetic force fluxes.


I also found that Dr. Yoon explained the X-Ray Diffraction mechanism
from his new atomic model's viewpoint at other part of his book. You
can see the following statement from the preface of the book
(http://www.yoonsatom.net).

"....... How can X-Rays and Gamma-Rays have corpuscular character as
they propagate through the space? It is due to the reason these rays
with the shortest wavelengths are emitted from the innermost electron
rings of atoms of inside layers building material systems, so they have
to build diffraction beams, as they pass through material systems. In
contrast, visible lights are emitted from material surface, so they
decrease their intensity uniformly obeying the inverse square distance
rule, as they propagate through the space. That is why X-Rays and
Gamma-rays behave like corpuscles. ......"


Dr. Hansik Yoon also explained the diffraction of Light as well as
refraction of Light, stating that the refraction of light is NOT due to
the speed difference of lights propagating in different material
systems with different densities.

newedana wrote:
I found that Dr. Hansik Yoon clearly explained the Diffraction
Mechanism of Electrons (or Double Slit Experiment, if you like) and
relevant subjects from his new atomic model's viewpoint in the
following contents.

I don't care if he "clearly explains" it or not (and judging from what
you quote below, he is anything but clear - he is as vague as one can
get!). Can he describe the experimental results *quantitatively*?
*That* is the point here.


So, he effectively disproved the wave-particle dualism and the
relativity theory as well as quantum mechanics.

Only if he can explain the observations *quantitatively*.

So far, all you have shown was rhetoric and qualitative handwavings.
That's not physics.



Part II. The Energy World
Chapter 1. Dualism of Wave-Corpuscle
1)Louis de Broglei's Electron
2)How can Moving Electron have a Wave Character
3)Diffraction Mechanism of Charged Particles
4)Energy Dumping by Charged Particles Accelerated
5)Mass Body Never Reduces its Absolute Mass

Dr. Yoon clearly explained the diffraction mechanism of charged
particles(electrons) like that:

A lot of rhetoric yet again. Where are the *quantitative* descriptions?


Because the charged particles perform a longitudinal oscillation when
accelerated,

Evidence, please.


they construct alternative layers of wave phases
constructed with faster and slower speeds.

Longitudinal oscillations of a particle moving along has little to
do with "wave phases".

Add "waves" to the things which Dr. Yoon obviously does not understand.


When collimated electrons
move in parallel and pass through narrow spacing of crystal lattice,
they turn out to build numerous spherical waves

How and why should they?


between which the phase
interference takes place.

And how does he explain that one gets interference patterns even if
one takes care that only one electron at a time goes through the slits?



In the case of destructive interference between different speed wave
phases make charged particles deflect by right angles.

How on earth should that happen? How can two particles moving in the
same directions lead to a deflection at a right angle? Ever heard of
the conservation of momentum?


In the case of
constructive wave phase interference, charged particles can proceed
forward in straight with integrated faster and slower speed.

What does "integrated" mean here?


Thus the
charged particles can build a diffraction pattern as X-ray does as they
pass through the crystal lattice.

Handwaving combined with a lot of unsupported assertions and plain
nonsensical statements. And *this* you call a clear explanation? You
have strange standards.


In short, the mechanism of forming
spherical wave fronts by accelerated charged particles is that when
their plane wave fronts pass through optical apertures they turn out to
be slitted into numerous tiny beams of particle flow.

And how exactly does this work?



Magnetic fluxes induced by these accelerated charged particles result
to bind their shifted electric force fluxes.

And how exactly does this work?


Spherical wave fronts are
thus made possible from accelerated charged particles when their plane
wave fronts pass through crystal lattices.

Agreed. Hint: that's simply Huyghen's principle. We don't need Dr. Yoon's
strange ideas to explain that.



So, while the charged particles keep their speed in constant, the
orientation angle of electric fluxes does not change due to a balance
between the electric repulsion between individual electric force fluxes
and the binding force of self-induced magnetic force fluxes.

Incomprehensible.



I also found that Dr. Yoon explained the X-Ray Diffraction mechanism
from his new atomic model's viewpoint at other part of his book. You
can see the following statement from the preface of the book
(http://www.yoonsatom.net).

"....... How can X-Rays and Gamma-Rays have corpuscular character as
they propagate through the space? It is due to the reason these rays
with the shortest wavelengths are emitted from the innermost electron
rings of atoms of inside layers building material systems,

Gamma rays come from the nucleus, not from the electrons surrounding it.



as they pass through material systems.
so they have to build diffraction beams,

What is a "diffraction beam", and *why* do they have to build that?


In contrast, visible lights are emitted from material surface,

Huh??? Does he mean from the outer electrons, or what???


so they
decrease their intensity uniformly obeying the inverse square distance
rule, as they propagate through the space.

How on earth does that follow???

Oh, BTW, X-rays and gamma rays also obey the inverse square rule. Yet
another thing which Dr. Yoon apparently does not know.


That is why X-Rays and
Gamma-rays behave like corpuscles. ......"

Pardon?????????????

Where in the above did Dr. Yoon explain why X-Rays and gamma rays
behave like corpuscles???

And, BTW: visible light *also* behaves like (composed of) corpuscles.
Dr. Yoon should look up the photo effect.



Dr. Hansik Yoon also explained the diffraction of Light as well as
refraction of Light, stating that the refraction of light is NOT due to
the speed difference of lights propagating in different material
systems with different densities.

Bad for him, since the light speed in materials have been actually
*measured*.


Summary of your post: no explanations, no quantitative descriptions,
only vague handwavings, unsupported assertions, nonsensical
statements, huge jumps in logic, and an amazing display of ignorance.

How on earth did Yoon manage to obtain a PhD? He apparenty knows less
than many layman crackpots.


Bye,
Bjoern

You better read Dr. yoon's article published in 1987 Apr in Nature
(magmillan Co. London) as a letter form titled" Fiber Synthesis by
Growth-Packing" as a star article( shown at News and view column in the
same issue). It is a polymer physics discribing a simulation experiment
of forming native fibers such as wood pulp or cotton fibers, or
proterin animal fibers such as wool or your hair, utilizing aromatic
polyamides. I believe his article was a monumental work in the history
of physical chemistry. Herhaps you may be also skeptical why his
experiment can be a monumental work, and how did Nature publish his
manuscript as a star article. I know early that QM man cannot
differenciate the acoustic wave from electromagnetic wave. And also
cannot differenciate the electron from light in term of forming wave.
In your idea light is corpuscles, but in Dr Yoon's idea light is an
electromagnetic wave which is continuous in character, forming numerous
layers of concentric spherical wave fronts surounding its source. Your
QM man believes that light is corpuscular photons which can travel in
the vacant space with their momentum given by its source, as though a
batted baseball flying in the sky, but Dr. Yoon thinks that light
propagation is an equilibrating process of electromagnetic energy
emitted by atoms building light source. In Dr.Yoon's idea electron can
coexist with protons in nuclear structure, but your QM man does not
accept such an idea. That is, Dr. Yoon has entirely different idea from
yours, and so can say that gammer rays can be emitted by oscillating
electron rings at the nearest site of nucleus. He estimated
theoretically that the electron ring with 1/431 of radius of that
emitting Lyman series of hydrogen spectrum, can emit such gammer rays.
You better go to the library of Chicago University and read his text.
Diffracted x-ray behaves like corpuscles, and cannot propagate by
inverse square distance rule. newedana says to Bjoen Feuerbacher.

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. You better read Dr.Yoon's text.
You will find how beautifully he could explain the mechanism of
generating such electromaghetic waves with a variety of wavelengths by
atoms. The mechanism is exactly the same as that of generating radio
waves with a RC resonant circuit. Perhaps you will find that how
scientific is his explanation. 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. So they should have
the same mechanism of generating them by orbital electrons, right? Then
have you ever heard such a science decribing the mechanism of
generating a variety of electromagnetic wave by atoms? 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. But according to Dr. Yoon's
science it is a big mistate! I am sure you would say, how on earth did
Yoon manage to obtain a PhD. He apparenty knows less than many layman
crackpots. 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. 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. QM physicists are quite ignorant as to the
dimension of proton, compared with a hydrogen atom. It has merely
1/10^15 of hydrogen atom. 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. 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. It appears that the quantum mechanists could say this
kind of big lie during the last 20th century, because they are
completely ignorant for the mechanism of generating electromagnetic
waves by atoms, and even for radio waves generated by RC resonant
circuits. I find in his book it is explaind very scientifically the
mechanism of emitting and absorbing microwaves by electron rings of
hydrogen atoms involved in test chemicals, with the aid of field
magnetism, which construct so called NMR spectrum. newedana says to
Bjoen Feuerbacher

newedana wrote:

I notice you did, as usual, not bother to answer any of my questions
for evidence, formulas etc., and ignored all my arguments.


You better read Dr. yoon's article published in 1987 Apr in Nature
(magmillan Co. London) as a letter form titled" Fiber Synthesis by
Growth-Packing" as a star article( shown at News and view column in the
same issue). It is a polymer physics discribing a simulation experiment
of forming native fibers such as wood pulp or cotton fibers, or
proterin animal fibers such as wool or your hair, utilizing aromatic
polyamides. I believe his article was a monumental work in the history
of physical chemistry.

Nice for him. But why do you think that someone who is able to do
great experiments in physical chemistry is also qualified to set up
theoretical models?


Herhaps you may be also skeptical why his
experiment can be a monumental work, and how did Nature publish his
manuscript as a star article.

No.

I am well aware that people can be great experimenters and
nevertheless write nonsense on theory. Plichta or Galeczki&Marquardt
come to mind.



I know early that QM man cannot
differenciate the acoustic wave from electromagnetic wave.

I have no clue what on earth this is supposed to mean.


And also
cannot differenciate the electron from light in term of forming wave.

Or that.


In your idea light is corpuscles, but in Dr Yoon's idea light is an
electromagnetic wave which is continuous in character,

Wrong. Get an education.
Try understanding what "wave-particle dualism" means.

How does Dr. Yoon explain the photo effect and the Compton effect?


forming numerous
layers of concentric spherical wave fronts surounding its source.

BFD. Huyghens wrote this already centuries ago.


Your QM man

Who?


believes that light is corpuscular photons

Wrong. Get an education.
Try understanding what "wave-particle dualism" means.


which can travel in
the vacant space with their momentum given by its source,

Hey, you got that right, congratulations!


as though a batted baseball flying in the sky,

Wrong. Get an education.
Try understanding what "wave-particle dualism" means.


but Dr. Yoon thinks that light
propagation is an equilibrating process of electromagnetic energy
emitted by atoms building light source.

How does Dr. Yoon explain the photo effect and the Compton effect?


In Dr.Yoon's idea electron can
coexist with protons in nuclear structure,

How does he explain Hofstadter's results on the structure of nuclei,
protons and neutrons?


but your QM man does not accept such an idea.

Because it has experimentally shown to be wrong.


That is, Dr. Yoon has entirely different idea from
yours,

And his idea has experimentally shown to be wrong over 50 years ago
already.

Someone doing great experiments on physical chemistry shouldn't
try to set up a theory about nuclei without checking at least
the *basics* of the literature on all the experiments done there!


and so can say that gammer rays can be emitted by oscillating
electron rings at the nearest site of nucleus.

Can he explain the observations *quantitatively* based on this idea?


He estimated
theoretically that the electron ring with 1/431 of radius of that
emitting Lyman series of hydrogen spectrum, can emit such gammer rays.

Please show the derivation.

And please show the evidence that such rings exist.

Please explain all the observations which show that in contrast,
*orbitals* do in fact exist.


You better go to the library of Chicago University and read his text.

Why should I, as long as you present only rhetoric and ignore most
questions and arguments and evidence?


Diffracted x-ray behaves like corpuscles, and cannot propagate by
inverse square distance rule.

But it was *experimentally* *shown* that x-rays obey the inverse
square rule. In fact, this is checked routinely in *many* undergrad
lab courses in physics in thousands of universities wordlwide!


newedana says to Bjoen Feuerbacher.

Displaying his ignorance and his denial of reality yet again.


Bye,
Bjoern

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

How does Dr. Yoon explain the photo effect and the Compton effect?


That is why I recommended you to read Dr.Yoon's book.
Dr. Yoon treated with these two monumental works in his book, but he
explained them with his own principles set up without any postulations,
and entirely different from current one, saying that readers would be
able to find, how A. Einstein and Compton's explanations for these
physical events are so childish and primitive. Only mathematicians who
do not know what is natural science can do such interpretations, in
order to cheat people in the name of mathematical justification. It
signifies that mathematical measurement is not so valuable than true
understanding things qualitatively. newedana says to Bjoern
Feuerbacher