Comment on sweet dreams

dohpaz42@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  you have to fail intro to qm 101 and/or be stoned out of your mind to think this way

  source

  • antidote101@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Or just reject plank length and all other dimensional limitations like it.

    source

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Plank length is not like universal pixels. It’s just where current models say there’s little reason to look at smaller things, since it’s kind of like worrying about which flecks of paint are coming off a car in a racing video game. It’s just … so irrelevant as to be ignorable.

      It’s nigh impossible to have any energy that could interact with us or atoms on the Plank scale that wouldn’t just collapse in to a black hole. It’s not so much any observation of real-world pixelation, and more that even to atoms, it’s very tiny.

      source

      • antidote101@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Your comment about current models, known energy types, and universal pixels seems to ignore the post’s topic (which isn’t really about known models or energy types).

        A better way to disregard the post would be to just point out that solar systems aren’t that big in terms of scales of the universe, and that there’s no indication of any charges, electrons, or valance layers about.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      planck length doesn’t come up even once, it all boils down to these things: 1. electron has momentum, and from that follows it has a wavelength, and at the same time 2. orbit is stable, which means that after every “rotation” electron has to end up with the same phase, which means there is only a finite number of solutions to time-independent schroedinger equation for (hydrogen) atom (don’t bother solving it on paper for anything with more than one electron) and these things are spherical harmonics

      source
  • dohpaz42@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    And why is that?

    source

    • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      planetary orbits are not quantized, for starters. atomic orbitals are occupied by pairs (at most) of electrons, and this is because of qm spin exists which has no analogue in large scale. it’s also a staple among vapid thonkers like mckenna

      source
    • Artyom@lemm.ee ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Here’s a few reasons this doesn’t work:

      1. Planets are different sizes, electrons are all identical
      2. 2 planets cannot occupy the same orbit, but (at least) two electrons with opposite spin can
      3. If you have a high speed planet entering the solar system, you can’t transfer some of its energy to another planet and have the rogue planet continue with less energy
      4. All orbital energies are possible, not so much for atoms
      5. Planetary orbits emit gravitational waves. If electrons produced the equivalent (bremstrahlung radiation) during “orbit”, they would collide with the nucleus hilariously fast. This isn’t a problem because electron orbitals don’t have a physical representation.

      source

      • HawlSera@lemm.ee ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Thank

        source
  • mutilated_sphincter@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Can confirm the latter makes you consider this

    source
  • HawlSera@lemm.ee ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Can confirm, this is ALL I see on certain substances

    source
• skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  it’s not commonly discussed because it’s wrong

  source
• Kalkaline@leminal.space ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  You just need to know what happens to the elements on the periodic table that have the highest atomic weights. Here’s the article for Lawrencium give that a quick read through and then try to figure out why the universe is almost certainly not a very large atom as we define it.

  source
• essell@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It is in the right groups. Sort of thing you can find talked about at flat earther meetings all over the globe, UFO enthusiasts if you can get a word in to ask and in Christian science journals.

  source
• Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  because it only seems believable if you’re using an outdated and simplified model for atoms, and forget about the fact that atoms are also made up of protons/neutrons who are in turn made up of quarks, and the fact that there are a whole bunch of other fundamental particles that don’t give a toss about atoms.

  If you look at the more accurate electron cloud model it stops making sense to compare it to a solar system.

  source