[geocentrism] Re: Atoms & Electrons
- From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 13:20:24 +0000 (GMT)
Philip M
Well I once saw a 'photo' of the shadow of an atom but a search produced only
348,000 hits (almost none today!) and only the first seemed to be relevant -
http://openweb.tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/1978-10/1978-10-12-NBC-20.html and it
contains no details. I have no other recollection of this event. (I didn't
check past the first page). But then photos aren't proof are they? All those
photos from the Moon's surface, from the surface of Mars etc -- they're all
fakes aren't they? Why would you place more credence in a single report of the
photographing of an atom? And have you actually seen and critically examined it?
I agree there are a number of models over which there is debate.
Don't tell me you took my last comment at face value Philip. There were no
smilies or strings of exclamation marks I know but gee ...
Now this 'theory stated as fact' thing. One day I'll take a section of the
Bible and rewrite it in the manner you (and others) suggest that science should
be reported.
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, 7 February, 2008 11:24:09 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Atoms & Electrons
But why bother? It's all the work of those lying scientists and no one has ever
seen one, so they probably don't exist anyway.
Paul D
Oh they have been seen Paul.. Its just the modelling thats debateable. And
once again thats ok, so long as theory is not talked of as fact. You all
wriggle around that one.. There is no such thing as "almost a fact".. It is or
it isn/t
I thought neutrons were a combined proton and neutron. always in the nucleus,
having the major weight of the proton of course. Some atoms have neutrons, not
necessarily isotopes.. from memory. But now of course we hear of quarks, and a
neutron becomes something else, on the unending path of changing hypothesis..
Not necessarily liars Paul, but dreamers raised on Startrek. They won't believe
in God, but anything else is fine...
Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Deema
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 3:28 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Atoms & Electrons
Jack L
The number of electrons equals the number of protons (unless it's ionised).
The number of neutrons depends upon whether it's an isotope (and which isotope).
The number of electron orbits depends upon which element you're talking about
(and from memory, something to do with energy levels such as in hydrogen where
there is only one electron but in one of two orbits). The number of electrons
in each orbit depends upon which element you're talking about and on the
maximum number which can fit in that orbit.
You could do worse than go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom and do a quick
self-help exercise. (If that's not enough detail, the article has 119
references plus many embedded links).
But why bother? It's all the work of those lying scientists and no one has ever
seen one, so they probably don't exist anyway.
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, 7 February, 2008 2:34:52 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Atoms & Electrons
I also forgot to ask if there is any relationship between the number of
protons, the number neutrons and the number of electrons?
Jack Lewis wrote:
Dear All,
I'm doing an illustration of an atom and I would like to know if the electrons
all orbit the nucleus at the same distance or do they have different orbits?
Jack
Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1262 - Release Date: 6/02/2008
9:13 AM
Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
www.yahoo7.com.au/y7mail
Other related posts:
