alright1234 Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 Schrödinger's electron electric wave replaced with an electron probability wave but an electron position probability can only represent a positive value or zero and cannot depict a negative value that is required in representing destructive wave interference used to derive the equations of the atomic orbitals. Also, Schrödinger's wave function represents a plane wave that average positive and negative amplitudes do not decrease as the distance propagated increases which conflicts with Schrödinger's wave equation represented with a spherical coordinates system that depicts a spherical wave that average positive and negative amplitudes are dependent on the inverse of the distance. Using Schrödinger's wave function (plane wave) in a spherical coordinate system is mathematically invalid since a plane wave is diametriacally not a spherical wave. The spherical coordinate system of Schrödinger's equation depicts a spherical wave yet the majority of equations of the atomic orbitals derived using Schrödinger equation do not depict a spherical wave. The derivation of the atom's structure ends after the particle-in-box transformation since the reason for the box normalization was because the original de Broglie atomic electron matter wave could not be represented in a spherical coordinate system since the path of a matter wave around an atomic nucleus conflicts with the spherical coordinate system that begins at the origin an extends to the outer radius of the atom. Do you agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAHD Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 You need to stop with the word salad. Are you some philosophy major trying to look smart to your engineering major schoolmates? 3 single post topics, 3 times you use the wrong values or misapply something... If you do not have a course that teaches Dimensional Analysis on your plate, do yourself a favor and add one or take it up in your spare time. It will help you IMMENSELY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alright1234 Posted March 19, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 (edited) Everything that is posted I can verify. "1. The theory which is reported in the following pages is based on the very interesting and fundamental researches of L. de Broglie' on what he called "phase-waves" ("ondes de phase") and thought to be associated with the motion'of material points, especially with the motion of an electron or proton. The point of view taken here, which was first published in a series of German papers, is rather that material points consist of, or are nothing but, wave-systems. This extreme conception may be wrong, indeed it does not offer as yet the slightest explanation of why only such wave-systems seem to be realized in nature as correspond to mass-points of definite mass and charge. On the other hand the opposite point of view, which neglects altogether the waves discovered by L. de Broglie and treats only the motion of material points, has led to such grave difficulties in the theory of atomic mechanics —and this after century-long development and refinement— that it seems not only not dangerous but even desirable, for a time at least, to lay an exaggerated stress on its counterpart. In doing this we must of course realize that a thorough correlation of all features of physical phenomena can probably be afforded only by a harmonic union of these two extremes." (Schrödinger, p. 1049-50). Edited March 19, 2019 by alright1234 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alright1234 Posted March 19, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 (edited) Everything.------------> Quote any sentence of the original post and I will verify it. Thank you. Edited March 19, 2019 by alright1234 GAHD 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAHD Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 Everything.------------> Quote any sentence of the original post and I will verify it. Thank you.Sure. ...cannot depict negative value that is required in representing destructive wave interference...Word salad. Mostly because "negative" is an arbitrary thing. -> Two opposing vectors are both "positive" values but the result is a cancellation(destructive interference). The same is true about waves out of phase. English is VERY bad at describing the universe because of this double/triple tasking of words such as negative/anti. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralfcis Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 Polly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAHD Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 Polly?Probably not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alright1234 Posted March 19, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 "Two opposing vectors are both "positive" values but the result is a cancellation (destructive interference)." What kind of vectors? ________________________________________________________________________________ "As an alternative, in 1926 German physicist Max Born sharply refined Schrodinger's interpretation of an electron wave, and it is his interpretation--amplified by Bohr and his colleagues--that is still with us today......He asserted that an electron wave must be interpreted from the standpoint of probability." (Greene, p. 105)."Just a few months after de Broglie's suggestion, Schrodinger took the decisive step toward this end by determining an equation that governs the shape and the evolution of probability waves, or as they came to be known, wave functions." (Greene, p. 107). "As an alternative, in 1926 German physicist Max Born sharply refined Schrodinger's interpretation of an electron wave, and it is his interpretation--amplified by Bohr and his colleagues--that is still with us today......He asserted that an electron wave must be interpreted from the standpoint of probability." (Greene, p. 105). "Just a few months after de Broglie's suggestion, Schrodinger took the decisive step toward this end by determining an equation that governs the shape and the evolution of probability waves, or as they came to be known, wave functions." (Greene, p. 107). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAHD Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 "Two opposing vectors are both "positive" values but the result is a cancellation (destructive interference)." What kind of vectors? https://mathinsight.org/vector_introduction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alright1234 Posted March 19, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 How do two positive vectors cancel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exchemist Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 (edited) Schrödinger's electron electric wave replaced with an electron probability wave but an electron position probability can only represent a positive value or zero and cannot depict a negative value that is required in representing destructive wave interference used to derive the equations of the atomic orbitals. Also, Schrödinger's wave function represents a plane wave that average positive and negative amplitudes do not decrease as the distance propagated increases which conflicts with Schrödinger's wave equation represented with a spherical coordinates system that depicts a spherical wave that average positive and negative amplitudes are dependent on the inverse of the distance. Using Schrödinger's wave function (plane wave) in a spherical coordinate system is mathematically invalid since a plane wave is diametriacally not a spherical wave. The spherical coordinate system of Schrödinger's equation depicts a spherical wave yet the majority of equations of the atomic orbitals derived using Schrödinger equation do not depict a spherical wave. The derivation of the atom's structure ends after the particle-in-box transformation since the reason for the box normalization was because the original de Broglie atomic electron matter wave could not be represented in a spherical coordinate system since the path of a matter wave around an atomic nucleus conflicts with the spherical coordinate system that begins at the origin an extends to the outer radius of the atom. Do you agree?No. Your error is that the "waves" in QM are waves not of probability but of the square root of probability density, more or less. You multiply the wave function by its complex conjugate (the equivalent of squaring a function with complex numbers in it), giving you a square modulus, which is a probability density function. You integrate this over the region of space of interest, in order to find the probability of the entity being found in that region. So you have +ve and -ve phases of the wave function but only +ve values of the probability density and hence of the probability itself. A good example is a p orbital. This is dumbell-shaped with a +ve phase in one lobe and a -ve phase in the other, but the probability of finding the electron in either lobe is the same, because when you square it you get rid of the minus sign. (This is general with waves. With light, the light intensity is the square modulus of the amplitude. The amplitude can be +ve or -ve but the intensity is always +ve, obviously.) The rest of your post betrays more misunderstandings. For instance Schrödinger's equation can apply to a number of scenarios, ranging from the harmonic oscillator to the particle in a box to the particle on a ring to the hydrogen atom. You need to read more before making these dismissive remarks. They make you look foolish. Edited March 19, 2019 by exchemist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alright1234 Posted March 19, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 exchem---still how do you add probability that cancel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exchemist Posted March 20, 2019 Report Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) exchem---still how do you add probability that cancel?You don't. Just as you don't "add light intensities that cancel", when two light waves interfere to produce an interference pattern. The amplitudes add, and the resultant amplitude from that gives rise to the observed pattern of light intensity. I repeat, light intensity is the square modulus of light wave amplitude. And probability density is the square modulus of the amplitude of a QM wave function. If you do not know enough maths to understand this there is little hope. (Think: 2 x 2 = +4 and -2 x -2 = +4 as well, right?) Edited March 20, 2019 by exchemist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alright1234 Posted March 20, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) exchemist "Think: 2 x 2 = +4 and -2 x -2 = +4 as well, right?" Wave interference is based on addition and sub. of vectors to form the cancellation. Multiplication is different from addition and subtraction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subtraction Are you saying that there is little hope for QM that which I wholeheartedly agree, according to the mathematics vest in me. Your dear and beloved friend. Thank you Edited March 20, 2019 by alright1234 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alright1234 Posted March 20, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) PART II Next part is can a spherical coordinate system represent a non-spherical structure? My contention is that a spherical CS represents a sphere and conversely a cylindrical CS represents a cylinder. What do you think. My good friends? Thank you. Edited March 20, 2019 by alright1234 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exchemist Posted March 20, 2019 Report Share Posted March 20, 2019 exchemist "Think: 2 x 2 = +4 and -2 x -2 = +4 as well, right?" Wave interference is based on addition and sub. of vectors to form the cancellation. Multiplication is different from addition and subtraction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subtraction Are you saying that there is little hope for QM that which I wholeheartedly agree, according to the mathematics vest in me. Your dear and beloved friend. Thank youYou are an idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alright1234 Posted March 20, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2019 We were talking about destructive interference and it was YOU that brought up multiplication. "Think: 2 x 2 = +4 and -2 x -2 = +4 as well, right?" Not me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.