Scattering and atomic energy

Light that is of the wrong or shorter wavelength than can be absorbed
fully might scatter with an atomic electron and raise it's energy
level through partial absorption(the Compton effect.) I propose that
matter might steel a light wave's energy in order to go through
orbital transitions.

Mitch Raemsch -- Falling Toward Light --

On 18 Dec, 06:29, "Androcles" <Engin...@hogwarts.physics_a> wrote:

You are phenomenally stupid!, Macaroni! Italian food is not, so you
discredit it via your appropriation of a famous and important element
in the diet of any healthy overweight Italian.

Take some smart pills and get back to me, twit.
--
'foolsrushin.'

On 18 Dec, 06:29, "Androcles" <Engin...@hogwarts.physics_a> wrote:

You are phenomenally stupid!, Macaroni! Italian food is not, so you
discredit it via your appropriation of a famous and important element
in the diet of any healthy overweight Italian.

Take some smart pills and get back to me, twit.
--
'foolsrushin.'

On Dec 17, 9:50 pm, BURT <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote:

There is some support for that notion as long as you don't
equate an atomic orbital to the gravitational orbits of
a solar system.

<< Oseen mentions several such [newer] works, especially
that by Gordon and a recent one by O. Klein, based on
the wave theory, treating both electrons and light as
waves. They all arrive at the same equations for the
conservation of energy and momentum between the
scattered wave and the recoiling electron as originally
derived by Compton assuming a two-particle collision.
"The basis for the Compton-Debije theory is thus found,
this time not as a hypothesis but as a consequence of
the atomic theory," is a conclusion by Oseen, which
justifies his judgement of the former being obsolete.
These wave mechanical treatments, furthermore, also
gave formulae for the intensity vs scattering angle
(i.e. differential cross section) in much better
agreement with measurements than the classical
wave theory prediction. >>
[Only registered users see links. ]

Sue...

On Dec 17, 9:50 pm, BURT <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote:

There is some support for that notion as long as you don't
equate an atomic orbital to the gravitational orbits of
a solar system.

<< Oseen mentions several such [newer] works, especially
that by Gordon and a recent one by O. Klein, based on
the wave theory, treating both electrons and light as
waves. They all arrive at the same equations for the
conservation of energy and momentum between the
scattered wave and the recoiling electron as originally
derived by Compton assuming a two-particle collision.
"The basis for the Compton-Debije theory is thus found,
this time not as a hypothesis but as a consequence of
the atomic theory," is a conclusion by Oseen, which
justifies his judgement of the former being obsolete.
These wave mechanical treatments, furthermore, also
gave formulae for the intensity vs scattering angle
(i.e. differential cross section) in much better
agreement with measurements than the classical
wave theory prediction. >>
[Only registered users see links. ]

Sue...

On 19 Dec, 07:10, "Sue..." <[Only registered users see links. ].au> wrote:

Are you a boy or a girl. If the latter, I withdraw the unpleasant
remark I shall make later! Ain't ime travel great, twit! One day,
maybe, you will learn to think for yourselves (sic).
--
'foolsrushin.'

On 19 Dec, 07:10, "Sue..." <[Only registered users see links. ].au> wrote:

Are you a boy or a girl. If the latter, I withdraw the unpleasant
remark I shall make later! Ain't ime travel great, twit! One day,
maybe, you will learn to think for yourselves (sic).
--
'foolsrushin.'