SpaceTime

True working with any thing below a photon energy level will be hard, but the answers will be found because the masses of the atomic particles are different and they also react differently to similar energy levels. Every atom is constantly reacting with gravitational energy at the surface of the earth. Unfortunately this reaction is not catered for in the current quantum atomic model. Signed SpaceTime

The current motion is helical, and if you must not overshoot with the velocity component. This is like looking for a needle in a haystack. They dont fly apart, when you added the energy in the first place to accelerate, you changed the internal resonant wavelength structure, which forced a change in universal velocity to accomadate the change of the wavelength structure, or did you not account for the changed velocity in the atomic wavelength structure? I agree the energy has to basically exact when dealing with photon absorbsion and emmision. The probability of absorption going rapidly to zero I see differently. But when the atom deals with fractional component energy values the atom can absorb or release these minute energy components by simple phase modulation, i.e. the atom attempts to change its univeral velocity to correct for the induced phase error within its internal resonant structure, in this way the atom can be accelerated or de-accelerated within the universe. Signed SpaceTime

Which direction would you accelerate the ion particle long enough to enable this fusion to occur? I don't think that absolute zero velocity can be acheived in any practical way. The earth is a rotating and orbiting platform for a reason, and is one of the reasons atomic structure remains stable along with the universal velocity. Or do we just say stop the world I want to make an experiment. Swansont answer me this, the Quantum Model atom, can it only absorb energy at packets of photon quanta energy level, or can it receive packets of value say 0.84 or 1.24 quanta energy level. Signed SpaceTime

Gravity operates below the photon, electron reaction threshold level, it cannot be detected by bullying the atom as the photon does. Gravity is a gentle giant when dealing with the atomic structure. It has nothing to do with photons. Photon energy that is emmited as electromagnetic radiation, has occurred only when the electron has received an energy level that is greater than that provided to it by the universal velocity condition. Who has worked with energy levels below the photo electric affect? because you will find they do exist. Signed SpaceTime

What in your opinion happens at the event horizon near a black hole? does the speed of light climb to its c value slowly or just suddenly appear at the full speed of c as you start to move away from the black hole? Signed SpaceTime

I do understand what you are saying. The electron that goes into the end of a wire is stated as not the same one that comes out the other end, but the time of the total transfer of electromagnetic energy through the wire is almost c. The net result of jumping to a higher energy quantum state before re-emitting another photon collectively add up to the electromagnetic radiation affect being time delayed. I believe gravity fields also change the atomic energy quantum state, the only difference being gravity has the capacity to reduce or increase this state relative to the strength of the gravity field. Signed SpaceTime

This statement of yours re the speed of light c through a material is contradictory to the educational institutions statements. For example the speed of light through water is stated to be 33% slower than c. The speed of light more than appears to be slower than c, it is slower than c. Signed SpaceTime

Why when a stick is half placed in water and the other half is out of the water why does it appear bent at the point of entry? If gravitational fields also cause the refractive index to change then it is highly likely that the speed of light can be changed by the density of space-time, influenced by gravitational fields, this affect would become extreme near black holes. This area of debate is quite speculative and somehow does not really relate to the debate as to whether we should consider adding the universal velocity environment to be included in the QM atomic model. Just like current theories I dont have all the answers, but I feel I have some strong valid questions, re the atomic model. Signed SpaceTime

(Mass energy and curved space). This does not address gravitational theory but only attempts to explain the phenomina. All atomic mass interacts at atomic level, this interaction is referred to as gravitation although it is fundamentally electrically based. (Not too surprising, since it was never designed to address gravity in the first place. Science is incomplete. That's why scientists still have jobs. QED incorporates Maxwell's equations.) Exactly the quantum model was never designed to account for gravity, which means that it is incomplete. (If there is an absolute reference frame, how come no measurements can detect it? ) I have not discussed an absolute reference frame. We work with what we have. If we could fix our atomic theory up then maybe we can detect our "daily or yearly fluctuations in atomic spectra". (Shouldn't atoms at rest with respect to the CMB collapse, in your model?) If you had no universal motion the electron and proton would be unable to generate the necessary repulsive electromagnetic field, yes they would fuse together. Signed SpaceTime

I appologise if I have insulted anyone in this forum in particular you Swansont, and thank you 5614 for the information about Swansont. I had continued discussing theory with Swansont because he had appeared to know what he talking about. I do respect his opinions but I do not always agree with 100+ year old atomic principles. With respect to the preferred frames of reference it is important to note that the atomic models based from the beginning assume that it has no universal velocity. There is a big difference between assuming : 1: I am stationary relative to the atom next to me, and that the laws of physics apply in any inertial frame, and also that you have to be able to treat the particles as if they were at rest: My viewpoint whereby: 2: I am in universal motion along with the atom next to me, and the atomic model cannot assume the particles are at rest, but must always account for this universal motion: I feel this, along with the fact that charged particles in any form of universal motion, generate electric currents and subsequent magnetic fields, which the current Quantum atomic model does not address and does infact ignore. This is the fundamental differences of opinion which we have expressed in this forum. Signed SpaceTime

1: If the reference frame you use is correct please explain the fundamentals of gravitation. 2: If the electron and proton in universal motion is wrong please explain why? or is your electrical theory inadequate. I have worked with electrical theory all day every day since before I left school and I am 57 years old. I have experience you haven't even dreamt about. Also I hadn't finished providing information for you to even judge. 3: Quantum mechanic's may the most successful of all atomic models but it is a classic electrical failure. It is only a mathematical model to surcumvent the original classical model which was incomplete. It also fails to include the affect call gravity, or predict it functioning. 4: This doesn't deserve an answer, its the type of statement a man makes when he cannot explain himself, when his words fail him. Signed SpaceTime

Hi Swansont, It is time for you to go back to school, your babbling again, examine the laws governing parallel current carrying wires, this same affect applies within the vacuum of space, and the electrical particles don't have to travel within a wire (see vacuum tube theory), and this law does apply to atomic structure. Click here to start your education: http://www.wbabin.net/physics/torrance.htm P.S. The only preferred reference frame is the right one, You obviously haven't found it yet. Signed SpaceTime

Hi Swansont, Getting back to the two opposite charged particles (the proton and electron) if they are in motion travelling in the same direction, should they not electro-magnetically repel each other proportional to their universal velocity then? This then produces two electromagnetic fields that are identical in strength but opposite, because the charge values are equal although opposite. Outside of the atom the magnetic fields cancel out but inside they form a powerful magnetic repulsion between the charged particles, which is directly proportional to the velocity, do you agree with this?. In this way the oppositely charged particales attraction will still occurr but the magnetic repulsion will prevent them fusing together, agree? Signed SpaceTime