Hi, Cannot someone complain to Google groups about Georges, Archytas and other friends? jr writes> On whose behalf? I'd like to know whether any member likes my stuff or else I may as well get on a Hyde Park soap box. jr writes> You may even reach more people that way at any one time but its just in passing. When you permanently post something it is there for the duration and will represent you years from now barring super severe activity from the Sun. To get viewers to access your stuff you must obtain their interest. And then if successful you must impress them with your stuff. I'd nearly given up on whether there were any sane members here. The particle issue> http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/dk/bohr.htm Discussions with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics N Bohr "..however far the phenomena transcend the scope of classical physical explanation, the account of all evidence must be expressed in classical terms." Nils Bohr jr writes> We can build an atom from compacted electromagnetic field structures. That is: from electricity and magnetism which transcends the scope of our classical explanations. However, we can validate this structure in terms of its measured properties as an oscillating field that emits or absorbs energy in the form of frequency and wavelength.
To believe anything beyond earth has to fit earth is parochial. jr writes> Better to say that: to believe that the stuff we sense is causal because we sense it and can quantify it, is parochial. Goblins are not to be expected but life can come in many forms. We are only privy to that part of the universe that we can live in. No reason to believe that once that criteria exists anywhere it is any different than Earth except in other than fundamental detail. <<<Snipped section for lack of tangible substance>>>. Schrodinger and others strongly disliked the statistical approach as not leading to useful insights. jr writes> When you base your statistics on our inability to locate an imaginary quantity like an orbiting electron in the name of uncertainty you open a pandora's box of virtual particles to fill any pothole you stumble into that you did not anticipate. But this does not make the statistical approach void of useful insights. In an electromagnetic oscillating atomic field that creates and absorbs electron packets on the fly the statistical approach still offers a most probable or least action solution with regard to the emitted or absorbed electron. The uncertainty is tied to the atomic structure and function itself, rather than to our inability to locate a non existing entity. <<<snipped section for lack of addressable substance>>> Have a good time Adrian johnreed --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
