Science and quantum mechanics

Heisenberg : “ May be should it be possible to divide indefinitely matter, except that at the end it should not be really a division, but a transformation of energy into matter…” (See the part : “Discussion about language”)

For the structure of atom relatively to the one I will propose (Serge l’Eternel) :
Heisenberg : “Now, if a trajectory of electron does exist in a Wilson chamber, there must be one as well in atom. But I confess to already have had some doubts about it. Because if it is true that we calculate an electronic orbit following the classic Newtonian mechanics, we confer to it afterwards, with the help of the quantum conditions, a stability that it should never have in accordance with this same Newtonian mechanics ; and when the electron jumps (in the case of the emission of radiation) from an orbit to the other, we prefer to say nothing about this jump : is it a broad jump, a high jump or what else ? So in a certain sense, all the idea that we construct about the orbit of an electron inside atom has to be absurd. But then, what? (See the part : “The notion of “understand” in physics”)
Wolfgang (Pauli) approved. “All this is really extremely mysterious. If an orbit of electron does exist in atom, electron must obviously turn on this orbit in a periodic way, with a determined frequency. In that case, the laws of electrodynamics impose that the electrical oscillations come from the charge doing this periodic motion. In other words, some light has to be radiated with the same frequency. But in reality, this is not like this at all : the frequency of oscillation of the radiated light is in fact between the frequency of orbit which precedes the famous so mysterious jump and the one which follows. All this is basically pure madness.” (See the part : “The notion of “understand” in physics”)
Wolfgang : “…; with regard to both of us, honestly, we do even not believe in the electronic orbits…” (See the same part)
Heisenberg : “…Bohr must know, him also, that he begins with some hypotheses which contain some contradictions, which can not be right therefore in the considered form…” (See the same part)
Niels Bohr, Nobel Prize laureate in physics, and creator of the actual pattern for atom : “By stability, I mean that this is always the same substances, with the same properties, which appear…This is incomprehensible following the classic mechanics, especially if we admit that atom looks like a planetary system.” (See the same part)
He adds a bit further : “These images (of atoms), answered Bohr, have been deducted or rather if you prefer, “guessed” from experimental facts ; they are not the fruit of some sort of theoretical calculations. I Hope that these images describe the structure of atoms as good (but only as good) as possible in the visual language of the classic physics…”
Heisenberg : “But how will it be possible, in these conditions, to do some progresses? When all is said and done, has not it, physics, to be an exact science?” (See the same part)
“We must expect, said Bohr, that the paradoxes of the quantum theory, the incomprehensible aspects linked to the stability of matter, are going to be lighted in an always more distinct manner with every new experimental fact. If this is thus, we can hope that with time some new concepts will be formed, and that these new concepts will allow us to seize in a certain way even the not visual processes occurring in atom. But from that we are still very far.” (See the same part)

(From the same book as the previous post)

A bit of morality with Heisenberg

In “Physics and Beyond” of Werner Heisenberg (Nobel Prize laureate in physics), a book not only scientific but as well political, moral, and about philosophy and religion :

“…Nonetheless on a restriction basis, I have all the same to say that some rules exist which are effectively respected, though nobody does impose it. Thus, for example, we do not smoke and drink only rarely some alcohol…” (See the part : “A lesson of politics and history”)
Otherwise :
“The problem of values I said, this is the set of questions : what should we do? To what have we to aspire? How must we behave? The problem is then formulated by the human being and relatively to the human being ; this is the problem of the compass which has to orientate our way through life. This compass has received some very different names in the various religions and ideologies : “happiness”, “God’s willpower”, “the sense of life”, in order to quote just some of them…” (See the part : “Positivism, metaphysics and religion”)
As well about his relation with the Jews (without being one) when he did neither seem Marxist nor against workers :
“…About the anti-Semitism preached by Hitler, this is for me as well one of the most unpleasant aspects of the movement…” (See the part : “Revolution and university life”)
“…Our compatriots will understand, I hope fast enough, that we can not participate any more to the modern life without an efficient research ; they will may be acknowledge, especially relatively to the atomic physics, that the disdain shown toward the fundamental research by the actual national-socialist régime has contributed to the actual catastrophe or at least has constituted a symptom of it.” (See the part : “The way of the new start”)
What does sustain the theory following which Hitler was the false friend of the great innovators, which do not let dupe themselves and drive like this.
Finally we can read that the scientific thinkers are not some mad persons :
“…It is told that, when the first scientific society has been set up, they did take as a task to fight against the superstitions by refuting by some experiences the affirmations which were in the books of magic…” (See the part : “Positivism, metaphysics and religion”)

Article 2

Light logically should stem from the concentration of the malleable particles moving(1) themselves together or rather of their type if we consider the degree of fractality(2), and it can be accompanied by more or less warmth according to the quantity and the size of the sufficiently free particles of the second secondary element that it takes with(3) ; on the top of that for the luminous displacement we have better to remind that the primary or malleable particles directly obtained by the fractalization of Energy possess an autonomous and very fast movement out of the energetic attributes((2) and the posts of the same set), as well at a sufficient concentration of energy in a same direction, they can drive the particles formed by some cycles of these same primary particles, according to what they are at the foundation of all movements (in the case of light, see article 9 to come). Otherwise we could think that, out of the influence of the majority movement depending on the distribution of the energetic mass so on the shape, the movement in the malleable particle could orientate itself in a homogeneous manner.
But for our senses light possesses some different direct sources which can be some chemical reactions, as combustion, as well the one produces by fireflies, and the one corresponding to the nuclear fusions or the nuclear explosions ; but can also be electroluminescence produced for example by lightning. Besides we can notice that the luminous presence proves well here (in this system) that the energy is the same for electrons with electroluminescence during which they cohabit in a high concentration with light, and in nucleus with the light and not its absorption obtained with its opening. On the top of that, as it has been remarked in the previous article negativity can be accepted as it represents a lack, but it should unavoidably try to compensate itself, what is not observed here. Also if the search for absorption could be a present phenomenon for each peace of matter and proportional to its density, why to the planetary scale the biggest parts should be more easily attracted between them? Whereas thus they should cause to themselves more interaction as the identical parts of magnets, and then leave between them the small less dense particles, so of an inferior attraction; nevertheless flame goes up and there is not any space between a stone and the soil, at rest.
1: Colors could come from some different degrees of concentration. \ 2: See http://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2009/09/6.html \ 3: See http://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2009/09/god-and-elements-which-compose-it.html

Article 1

About the absolute vacuum we can mathematically consider that it represents nothingness so zero, what seems difficult to obtain with an absolute consideration, because from nothing nobody can produce anything so some space, for the reason that when there is an absolute vacuum between two sides they are sticking together; following what it should be even more difficult to obtain less than the absolute vacuum. Thus as it is better to consider what can exist than what cannot, zero can only be relative and the mathematical negativity only give utterance to a lack; nevertheless this is not a problem to consider geometrically the square root of a lack, what implies that the one of a negative number should in this case be rational, what is approached by the complex numbers where the missing part can be considered as imaginary and the present one as real; but in order to realize fully the consideration it should be noticed(1) square root of -1 = -1, because generally "i" is used for symbolizing the imaginary set but the negative sign should be enough.

(1) : Considering that a square missing surface can be the product of two missing sides, knowing that if only one has been present the surface should as well be missing, but there should be two roots for example 1 cm and -1 cm, one present and one missing ; as well the problem has to be well relativized because if the negative sign occurs as a relation then : -1(object) * -1 = 1(object), or may be better : - * 1(object) * - = 1(object), because the lack of a lack is a presence and the reject of this one is the multiplication by 0, so the relative non-being.

Conclusion before more sciences (included gravity)

Heisenberg and God :
To read before :http://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2009/08/heisenberg-and-god.html

In order to stay in the same frame of mind, with the memory of the exodus toward the regions of the western Europe of the learned Greeks and philosophic unpublished works after the capture of Constantinople by the Turks, what makes this movement of thought at least a little our heritage, I recommend you in the reasonable limits the philosophy which considers God from Socrates by way of René Descartes, because all of this although being able to differ about some different opinions, and depending on some truths that we can find in us perpetually, testifies as well to a continuity of the knowledge which is opened to us, and then to the will-power for the possession in us of a part always bigger of the divine eternity. As well it is good to honor the compatibility of some philosophies, because this is not a blemish supposing the copy, but an advantage permitting to participate in the running of the general thought out of continuity. The compatibility is an effort and not a facility, it supposes the mastery of the topic, but may be in some other words more personal, being anyway generally a part of the common sense to think; as well in order to be really useful, this effort has to bring some new ideas, actualizing the old ones at the same time. Lastly it is better to be lucid as Socrates, whose the philosophy is quite close, to the one limited as a religion, of Christianity, and which explains, in the 25th paragraph of the Plato’s Phaedrus, that in order to understand fully things, anybody should have a fully divine science; and thus even for a god, it is only possible to give an approximate idea, with satisfying himself out of a human science and its part of divinity. As well we have better to notice that this science with time tends with rigor logically to increase its part of truth, in order that we can be less approximate. Besides religion cannot permit to itself to preach some theories from the time in which they appear as scientific hypotheses, it has better to restrict itself the most as possible to certitudes, and then to stay in the field of the generalities capable of supporting moral.

About elements

Heisenberg and God :
To read before :
http://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2009/08/heisenberg-and-god.html

The most important in a materialistic way can seem to be the spinning center, of some stars, of the solar system, of the galactic whirls..., and then the important energy that it contains; thus God’s concentration is important concerning our existence, knowing that it can as well destroy us through the intermediate of God’s tertiary elements. But before the existence of stars, we have to consider an equilibrium of the energy forming some cycles permitting to obtain atoms, this by producing some light at a sufficient concentration, after a bowl of energy where some intermediate cycles are made and some atoms, as the center of some stars, that is what seems to happen by the intermediate of the telescope in what is designated to us as a black hole, with on the top of that the absorption of some already existing matter, but the phenomenons implied in this are not yet very clear, although an equilibrium is surely present and in part in the shape of a whirl apparently. The important natural elements developed after are the chemical components which will give soil, which will be agitated by the central movement and the interaction of stars ; as well volcanoes and the movements of the continental plates out of the energetic potential of the center of stars, next the gaseous layers of the atmosphere which retain water and the winds of gas moved among others by the interactions of stars, and the emissions of warmth which can form the lightning; lastly the living organisms stemmed from the combination or the equilibrium of all of this, what makes them very dependent.



In a sketched way, we obtain:

Energy
+
The Asymmetric Fractalization, Movement, Resistance, and Equilibrium
=
The Malleable particles, Light, the intermediate Particles, Warmth, Atoms, Molecules, Matter, Stars and their energetic potential


+
The Asymmetric Fractalization, Movement, Resistance, and Equilibrium
=
The Flows of particles, Gases, Liquids/
Their movements being due to their own equilibrium and to the one of stars


+
The Asymmetric Fractalization, Movement, Resistance, and Equilibrium
=
The Living Organisms

Water, lightning and living organisms

Water stems from the equilibrium of the energetic potential of stars which forms the different atoms and molecules; but in a usual manner we can observe its gaseous condensable emission during some combustions and mainly the one stemmed from volcanoes. As well if we can observe its presence on the Earth it is due to the inertia of the atmosphere which prevents from its dissipation in the space following the spinning movement of the Earth; thus it is possible to find it in three different forms which are vapor (clouds...), liquid (rains, lakes, rivers, seas...), and ice (snow, hail, ice-floe...). About the liquid streams they have in part the same causes as the considered winds (see last post) applied to the liquid element and can be influenced by them, as well tidal waves come from volcanic activities and the displacements of plates, where there is wave phenomenons but as well thermal(1) ones; and it has to be considered the variations of relief for the fluvial flows.
1: Also some enough powerful hurricanes can be accompanied by a groundswell of a considerable height.

Lightning is stemmed from the formation of some concentrated flows of particles, which are the ones of the two first secondary elements (see the beginning of the presentation of the elements), in which are some of those forming light; these flows are called electric currents, here they are formed in air where they make their way through moisture. For this it has to be enough particles in order to form these flows, to what warmth can contribute, after it has to be atmosphere which can retain water which forms clouds and moisture, which catalyze the currents of particles in order to make them electric.

Lastly living organisms are not without light, warmth, the different mineral and organic components which form soil, as well air so atmosphere, and lastly water. On the top of that it is possible to specify that a lot of animals are not without plants which assure the presence of oxygen, and these, if we use a microscope, without the unicellular microorganisms as protists, which are stemmed from the formation of DNA out of the elements which have just been quoted.