Bye Bye Quantum Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter VT
  • 41 comments
  • 1,547 views
VT

VT

Messages
2,275
United States
Forest, VA
Messages
schneiderj
Messages
Systemcrash9004
http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/research/story/0,9865,1627657,00.html

What has much of the physics world up in arms is Dr Mills's claim that he has produced a new form of hydrogen, the simplest of all the atoms, with just a single proton circled by one electron. In his "hydrino", the electron sits a little closer to the proton than normal, and the formation of the new atoms from traditional hydrogen releases huge amounts of energy.

This is scientific heresy. According to quantum mechanics, electrons can only exist in an atom in strictly defined orbits, and the shortest distance allowed between the proton and electron in hydrogen is fixed. The two particles are simply not allowed to get any closer.
Click to expand...

This could get interesting.
 
My thoughts exactly when I first read it.
 
It seems we're all thinking alike. I straight away thought of Famine as well, before I'd seen that other people had called for him... :crazy:
 
It's interesting, but I note that the first parallel drawn is with cold fusion...
 
This is scientific heresy. According to quantum mechanics, electrons can only exist in an atom in strictly defined orbits, and the shortest distance allowed between the proton and electron in hydrogen is fixed. The two particles are simply not allowed to get any closer.
Click to expand...
I thought it was already common knowledge that this is infact not true. Even in high school we learn that electrons exist in clouds surrounding the nucleus. And, I believe that electrons do tend to pass through the nucleus every so often (I heard that from my dad, who is a massive physics geek). So what's the point of this last paragraph, unless for some reason it only applies to the Hydrogen atom (or in this case, the 'Hydrino' atom).
 
Your dad is right - electrons exist in probability clouds. The probability of an electron being anywhere is never 0, but as you approach the "orbit" it increases to ~1. This guy is saying he has moved that "orbit" closer to the proton than it ought to be allowed.

But you're right - it's written in "layman".
 
Reminds me of some research I worked on with a professor trying to simulate hydrogen atoms using only classical methods.

We were actually quite successful and seems like this professor may be leveraging a simlar theory.

However, we were using classical theory only becuse it was computationally simpler than quantum.
 
Famine
It's interesting, but I note that the first parallel drawn is with cold fusion...
Click to expand...
That was instantly the first thing of which I thought, even just when reading the quote in the original post.
 
Young_Warrior
So know most of what I learnt in chemistry goes out the window and I have one useless and false gcse grade?
Click to expand...
I made the same realization during grade 11 when they started teaching us about electron clouds.
 
Well, most, if not all, of Quantom Physics is just a theory. Think of how long people thoght the sun revolved around us? Way more than just a half a century... It's possible for our theories of Quantom Physics to be wrong. I mean, the amount that this reaction is putting out isn't crazy big, like Cold Fusion. Only time will tell if this is real.
 
Young_Warrior
So know most of what I learnt in chemistry goes out the window and I have one useless and false gcse grade?
Click to expand...

Excuse me but... You didn't think English Literature was a false one too did you?
 
Ok then fair enough..

Back to subject, ooooooooo so if this is somehow true, In theory this could be done to other elements too?
 
All my knowledge of electrons, protons, and neutrons is this so far. There's a nucleus and there are 3 orbitals surrounding it in very strict locations. 2 electons can be on the first orbital, 8 on the second, and 8 on the third. As far as I know these rules simply CAN NOT be broken.
 
&#946
All my knowledge of electrons, protons, and neutrons is this so far. There's a nucleus and there are 3 orbitals surrounding it in very strict locations. 2 electons can be on the first orbital, 8 on the second, and 8 on the third. As far as I know these rules simply CAN NOT be broken.
Click to expand...
Theoretically. This is a theory, and theories can be proven wrong. It's not a law, like the Law of thermodynamics, or Newton's Laws.
 
Aha. I guess I missed that in my reading in school. Oops. But yeah I should have known. I'm sure a HIGH percentage of scientific studies are theories, right?
 
&#946
Aha. I guess I missed that in my reading in school. Oops. But yeah I should have known. I'm sure a HIGH percentage of scientific studies are theories, right?
Click to expand...
Yes. THere aren't many laws.
 
And most of those laws are theories correct? I've only read about few proven laws in my studies thus far in my school years.
 
&#946
And most of those laws are theories correct? I've only read about few proven laws in my studies thus far in my school years.
Click to expand...
Uhh some theories become Laws, but not all theories become laws, but all Laws were once theories.
 
&#946
All my knowledge of electrons, protons, and neutrons is this so far. There's a nucleus and there are 3 orbitals surrounding it in very strict locations. 2 electons can be on the first orbital, 8 on the second, and 8 on the third. As far as I know these rules simply CAN NOT be broken.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm... not really. That's ~16 year old's Chemistry.

If you looks at the p orbital, you'll probably notice that it goes right through the nucleus, but have never thought to ask why...
 
Famine
Hmmmm... not really. That's ~16 year old's Chemistry.

If you looks at the p orbital, you'll probably notice that it goes right through the nucleus, but have never thought to ask why...
Click to expand...
The electron cam be very close to the nucleus, but it cannot sit "on top" of it because the p-orbital "pinches" there--if I understand correctly.
 
skip0110
The electron cam be very close to the nucleus, but it cannot sit "on top" of it because the p-orbital "pinches" there--if I understand correctly.
Click to expand...

The electron can tunnel through to the other side of the p-orbital without going through the nucleus :)

Quantum mechanics states that there is a distance at which the electron/nucleus system is most stable. To move the electron closer requires an energy input. To move it farther away also requires an energy input. What it sounds like this guy has done is to 1)stableize a single hydrogen atom, which sounds impossible to me (electrons like to be in pairs) and 2)move the bottom of the potential well closer to the nucleus. This also seems impossible, as this well is characteristic to the type of atom, is experimentally testable, and has been confirmed a billion times (even by me in physical chemistry lab).

I'd like to see an explaination of how exactly this is supposed to work. For now it sounds like a bunch of crap trying to reel in investors and make this guy rich. After all, people will invest in anything if they don't know anything about it.

I'm skeptical. :)
 
"Randell Mills, a Harvard University medic...says that his company, Blacklight Power, has tens of millions of dollars in investment lined up to bring the idea to market. And he claims to be just months away from unveiling his creation."


The odor you're all detecting is that of a very large rat.

We'll know for sure in "just months", won't we?
 

Latest Posts

Back