![Bohr Model: A Delightful History [CC]](https://i3.ytimg.com/vi/8IIg4Qt_qv4/maxresdefault.jpg)
Bohr Model: A Delightful History [CC]
video description
Date: 2022-12-27
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 20
rodkeh
Thank you Kathy, for once I actually learned something useful from one of these internet science sites. Yes Niels Bohr was on the one hand a genius and on the other a fool.
When Bohr said he believed and the ground state was a stable state, he was in fact saying, that he believed what the data and scientific, experimental facts, were telling him and not what the theories say. That of course implies that the theory of the time was wrong or incomplete. and it was and the Bohr atom became a very useful teaching convention, to graphically and mathematically show and explain, in a layperson manner, a Physical phenomenon. At this point he demonstrated true genius by ignoring theories and trying to understand what the data was telling him, not what the theories predicted. If he had carried that attitude forward he could have made some really amazing discoveries but he fell back into the same old rut and went back to believing the theories instead of the data and scientific facts and this predilection to discard meaningful data because it contradicts the theory, has kept modern science and modern humanity in the dark ages for far too long.
Niels Bohr made the same mistake everyone makes when they look at the dynamics of electrons and protons at close range. According to the attractive forces present, the electron should crash straight into the nucleus. That is what all the measurements and mathematics tells us; that the electron orbiting at exactly the right distance, travelling at the speed of light, with all the external forces present, would never be able to establish a stable orbit but the data tells us that it does. So if we except what the all the data and mathematics is telling us and say screw the theory, this is what is happening and accept what it implies, the mystery disappears.
Bohr proved that he should never have given up experimental science because it was a loss to all of us. But he was a victim of the pervasive notion of conflict and opposition that saturates and permeates every corners of Physics. This confrontational attitude is the result of our evolution from hunter/gathers, where it was man against the elements and man against the animals and man against man, them against us. It was a matter of survival and carries forward today in the confrontational attitudes of modern science that keeps us all ignorant, babes in the woods. We see this confrontation language throughout science, where everything is opposites and symmetrical, positive and negative or north and south or left and right, men and women. But what if we're not talking about North and South but instead, in and out. And what if it isn't positive and negative but more or less. Men and women aren't opposites. We aren't anything like opposites. We are compliments and what if electrons and protons are not opposites but compliments? What if the electron does smash right into the nucleus but the nucleus is just a tightly packed mass of electrons, the problem is that the parking lot is full and if one more comes in, then another will have to leave, like in Snooker pool, when the cue ball strikes the rack and sticks but only one ball is expelled. As soon as the orbital electron strikes the nucleus, another is expelled, so it looks like it is orbiting but it is slight-of-hand, it is actually smashing straight in and that is why there is no energy loss from the electron's orbit. It doesn't orbit! In stead, the electrons occupy regions because outside of the nucleus, electrons try to stay as far away from each other as possible, so they naturally organize into symmetrical regions as illustrated the Chemistry description of electron energy levels. This time the Chemists got it right. If Bohr had pursued his original attitude and considered that the electron was doing exactly what it appeared to, he may have realized these facts and all the consequences and benefits it bestows.
All of these facts are proven mathematically and statistically using only the data of the Periodic Table of Elements and Isotopes, by the Halflec Model and everything and all anomalies of modern Physics, become self-evident in its universe, our universe. Not the universe dreamed up by a fool that thinks he is God and he can just imagine a universe and poof. If we want to understand this universe, the one we live in, then we need to look at it and say, What is it telling me? Not dream up an imaginary universe and then try to make this one fit. Theorists are snake oil salesmen trying to dupe the public into believing they have some special insight, like a priest in the temple of science, so the gullible public will pay them to fumble around in the dark. The data of the Periodic Table is the most accurate, precise and trusted data known to modern man and the conclusions, derived from the Halflec Model, can not be ignored because it also shows a significant flaw in the Periodic Table as a demonstration of its validity and efficacy.
I hope you find this comment at least as instructive as I found your video.
reply
Thank you Kathy, for once I actually learned something useful from one of these internet science sites. Yes Niels Bohr was on the one hand a genius and on the other a fool.
When Bohr said he believed and the ground state was a stable state, he was in fact saying, that he believed what the data and scientific, experimental facts, were telling him and not what the theories say. That of course implies that the theory of the time was wrong or incomplete. and it was and the Bohr atom became a very useful teaching convention, to graphically and mathematically show and explain, in a layperson manner, a Physical phenomenon. At this point he demonstrated true genius by ignoring theories and trying to understand what the data was telling him, not what the theories predicted. If he had carried that attitude forward he could have made some really amazing discoveries but he fell back into the same old rut and went back to believing the theories instead of the data and scientific facts and this predilection to discard meaningful data because it contradicts the theory, has kept modern science and modern humanity in the dark ages for far too long.
Niels Bohr made the same mistake everyone makes when they look at the dynamics of electrons and protons at close range. According to the attractive forces present, the electron should crash straight into the nucleus. That is what all the measurements and mathematics tells us; that the electron orbiting at exactly the right distance, travelling at the speed of light, with all the external forces present, would never be able to establish a stable orbit but the data tells us that it does. So if we except what the all the data and mathematics is telling us and say screw the theory, this is what is happening and accept what it implies, the mystery disappears.
Bohr proved that he should never have given up experimental science because it was a loss to all of us. But he was a victim of the pervasive notion of conflict and opposition that saturates and permeates every corners of Physics. This confrontational attitude is the result of our evolution from hunter/gathers, where it was man against the elements and man against the animals and man against man, them against us. It was a matter of survival and carries forward today in the confrontational attitudes of modern science that keeps us all ignorant, babes in the woods. We see this confrontation language throughout science, where everything is opposites and symmetrical, positive and negative or north and south or left and right, men and women. But what if we're not talking about North and South but instead, in and out. And what if it isn't positive and negative but more or less. Men and women aren't opposites. We aren't anything like opposites. We are compliments and what if electrons and protons are not opposites but compliments? What if the electron does smash right into the nucleus but the nucleus is just a tightly packed mass of electrons, the problem is that the parking lot is full and if one more comes in, then another will have to leave, like in Snooker pool, when the cue ball strikes the rack and sticks but only one ball is expelled. As soon as the orbital electron strikes the nucleus, another is expelled, so it looks like it is orbiting but it is slight-of-hand, it is actually smashing straight in and that is why there is no energy loss from the electron's orbit. It doesn't orbit! In stead, the electrons occupy regions because outside of the nucleus, electrons try to stay as far away from each other as possible, so they naturally organize into symmetrical regions as illustrated the Chemistry description of electron energy levels. This time the Chemists got it right. If Bohr had pursued his original attitude and considered that the electron was doing exactly what it appeared to, he may have realized these facts and all the consequences and benefits it bestows.
All of these facts are proven mathematically and statistically using only the data of the Periodic Table of Elements and Isotopes, by the Halflec Model and everything and all anomalies of modern Physics, become self-evident in its universe, our universe. Not the universe dreamed up by a fool that thinks he is God and he can just imagine a universe and poof. If we want to understand this universe, the one we live in, then we need to look at it and say, What is it telling me? Not dream up an imaginary universe and then try to make this one fit. Theorists are snake oil salesmen trying to dupe the public into believing they have some special insight, like a priest in the temple of science, so the gullible public will pay them to fumble around in the dark. The data of the Periodic Table is the most accurate, precise and trusted data known to modern man and the conclusions, derived from the Halflec Model, can not be ignored because it also shows a significant flaw in the Periodic Table as a demonstration of its validity and efficacy.
I hope you find this comment at least as instructive as I found your video.
reply
Roger. Cox49
Hello Kathy,
During this year's 'Women's History' month, can you connect these dots?
Watching your 'Bohr Model' post, I was intrigued by the story about Edward Pickering, who hired his maid Williamina Flemming. In1886, Pickering was given some grant money by Henry Draper's widow. With the grant money, Williamina Flemming hired a number of women they called 'Computers'.
dot,
dot,
dot.
In 2016 the movie 'Hidden Figures' was released, starring Kevin Costner and Taraji P. Henson. It's a story of three Black women mathematicians, called 'Computers' working at NASA as a part of the West Computers, a segregated group of African American women hired to process aeronautic data in the Space Race era.
Is there a path from Edward Pickering's women 'Computers' to the women 'Computers' working at NASA? Or is it a coincidence?
Which college did these women attend?
Are there other colleges offering similar educational opportunities today?
reply
Hello Kathy,
During this year's 'Women's History' month, can you connect these dots?
Watching your 'Bohr Model' post, I was intrigued by the story about Edward Pickering, who hired his maid Williamina Flemming. In1886, Pickering was given some grant money by Henry Draper's widow. With the grant money, Williamina Flemming hired a number of women they called 'Computers'.
dot,
dot,
dot.
In 2016 the movie 'Hidden Figures' was released, starring Kevin Costner and Taraji P. Henson. It's a story of three Black women mathematicians, called 'Computers' working at NASA as a part of the West Computers, a segregated group of African American women hired to process aeronautic data in the Space Race era.
Is there a path from Edward Pickering's women 'Computers' to the women 'Computers' working at NASA? Or is it a coincidence?
Which college did these women attend?
Are there other colleges offering similar educational opportunities today?
reply
Peter
Look this is a bit off topic but what you said brought to mind a post I made to another board, so.
If it is then we must. Such beauty, utterly humbling and just a bit terrifying.
We are all a very, very small part of the whole, but that part, that is us is a trip.
Oh and you might want to keep this in mind,
that Hydrogen is practically nothing with a specific charge.
In the beginning it made up almost everything that was.
Even if I cannot prove it, I have an inckeling there is just as much AntiHydrogen knocking around in the quanta. So, you say this cannot be? Well, what is the charge of an electron? And the charge of a proton? So you see it is happening all the time. What scale is the aspect of the super force dilation at a trillion degrees centigrade? Because I don't know. Why this may explain dark energy comes right down to moment. Wish I could add QED.
reply
Look this is a bit off topic but what you said brought to mind a post I made to another board, so.
If it is then we must. Such beauty, utterly humbling and just a bit terrifying.
We are all a very, very small part of the whole, but that part, that is us is a trip.
Oh and you might want to keep this in mind,
that Hydrogen is practically nothing with a specific charge.
In the beginning it made up almost everything that was.
Even if I cannot prove it, I have an inckeling there is just as much AntiHydrogen knocking around in the quanta. So, you say this cannot be? Well, what is the charge of an electron? And the charge of a proton? So you see it is happening all the time. What scale is the aspect of the super force dilation at a trillion degrees centigrade? Because I don't know. Why this may explain dark energy comes right down to moment. Wish I could add QED.
reply
Alan
Just think about how many accidents of history were involved with this saga. Had Bohr not also been a good soccer player, he might not have been invited by Rutherford to work with him; and even though Rutherford's and Bohr's separate ways of conceiving the nature of the atom did not converge, undoubtedly Rutherford's brilliance was a major stimulating factor in Bohr's thinking. And then there was the fanatical devotion of Bohr's fiancee. Had she been just a fairly ordinary gal, the publishing of many of Bohrs' ideas might have been delayed. And finally, had all this been delayed a couple of years, into the start of WW1, perhaps key associates of these guys might have been drafted into the army; or the whole effort might well have been distracted.
reply
Just think about how many accidents of history were involved with this saga. Had Bohr not also been a good soccer player, he might not have been invited by Rutherford to work with him; and even though Rutherford's and Bohr's separate ways of conceiving the nature of the atom did not converge, undoubtedly Rutherford's brilliance was a major stimulating factor in Bohr's thinking. And then there was the fanatical devotion of Bohr's fiancee. Had she been just a fairly ordinary gal, the publishing of many of Bohrs' ideas might have been delayed. And finally, had all this been delayed a couple of years, into the start of WW1, perhaps key associates of these guys might have been drafted into the army; or the whole effort might well have been distracted.
reply
Art
So it just sort of spins around, but doesn't fall in.
Right!
Uh-huh. And it doesn't fall in because.
Well because I said so.
Right. And you know the charge in the middle is pulling at it?
Yes, but it can't fall in.
Because you said so. Yes. Are you comfortable? Would you like a pillow, for your chair?
Um, no, why?
Well, I would think your ass would be somewhat sore, considering the size of what you've just pulled out of it!
He must have come across as a total crank to many.
reply
So it just sort of spins around, but doesn't fall in.
Right!
Uh-huh. And it doesn't fall in because.
Well because I said so.
Right. And you know the charge in the middle is pulling at it?
Yes, but it can't fall in.
Because you said so. Yes. Are you comfortable? Would you like a pillow, for your chair?
Um, no, why?
Well, I would think your ass would be somewhat sore, considering the size of what you've just pulled out of it!
He must have come across as a total crank to many.
reply
manifold
You have no idea how much I want to learn more about Niels Bohr and his simplified model of the atom, but if you think I will force myself to watch another minute of this video, or anything like it - with it's INSANE HAND WAVING - which is neither relevant to the content - nor showing any sign of resolving itself, then YOU ARE SADLY MISTAKEN!
Take your FAKE SEMAPHORE and GO TO HELL with it! ffs!
reply
You have no idea how much I want to learn more about Niels Bohr and his simplified model of the atom, but if you think I will force myself to watch another minute of this video, or anything like it - with it's INSANE HAND WAVING - which is neither relevant to the content - nor showing any sign of resolving itself, then YOU ARE SADLY MISTAKEN!
Take your FAKE SEMAPHORE and GO TO HELL with it! ffs!
reply
Chef
All disciplines sit in the lecture hall of physics. Biology is chemistry and chemistry is physics. I love these talks. The turn of the 2Oth century saw an explosion tin the world of physics that paralleled an equal revolution in the world of art. See Leonard Shlain's book, Art and Physics. Thank you for these passionate videos.
reply
All disciplines sit in the lecture hall of physics. Biology is chemistry and chemistry is physics. I love these talks. The turn of the 2Oth century saw an explosion tin the world of physics that paralleled an equal revolution in the world of art. See Leonard Shlain's book, Art and Physics. Thank you for these passionate videos.
reply
Shawn
Your wonderful stories breathe life into the stuffy explanations of scientists I learned in college. These are on par with Richard Rhodes Pulitzer winning book The making of the atomic bomb. Absolutely delightful. I now have something to listen to each day as I travel to work. Much thanks!
reply
Your wonderful stories breathe life into the stuffy explanations of scientists I learned in college. These are on par with Richard Rhodes Pulitzer winning book The making of the atomic bomb. Absolutely delightful. I now have something to listen to each day as I travel to work. Much thanks!
reply
Arturos
This pleasant-enough gaggle of physicists remind me of their contemporaries in the community of painters and artists, who knew each other personally, squabbled and supported one another, and shared a buzz that still tickles us today. Bohrs marriage is a volume of its own!
reply
This pleasant-enough gaggle of physicists remind me of their contemporaries in the community of painters and artists, who knew each other personally, squabbled and supported one another, and shared a buzz that still tickles us today. Bohrs marriage is a volume of its own!
reply
Frederico
Hi! Nice video, as always! A question: are you sure Niels Bohr was a good soccer player? As long as I know, his brother was a goalkeeper in the danish national team. And a very popular guy. I think people confused them frequently. And Niels found it amusing.
reply
Hi! Nice video, as always! A question: are you sure Niels Bohr was a good soccer player? As long as I know, his brother was a goalkeeper in the danish national team. And a very popular guy. I think people confused them frequently. And Niels found it amusing.
reply
George
Kathy, delighted by your history od Bohr model. While teaching Bohr model and Rutherford model of atom in Physics, I had never thought of the historical beats. Physics with history is really entertaining. Love the way you have presented Bohr model.
reply
Kathy, delighted by your history od Bohr model. While teaching Bohr model and Rutherford model of atom in Physics, I had never thought of the historical beats. Physics with history is really entertaining. Love the way you have presented Bohr model.
reply
Karl
I've heard a story from the son of ETH-professor Res Jost who was in Bohr's group in Kopenhagen: His assistants went to the cinema with him and they had to explain Bohr every scene because he was too slow in grasping what's going on.
reply
I've heard a story from the son of ETH-professor Res Jost who was in Bohr's group in Kopenhagen: His assistants went to the cinema with him and they had to explain Bohr every scene because he was too slow in grasping what's going on.
reply
Ron
Fantastic lecture Kathy! Thank you (I think because I'm sure to spend too much time watching them) As an E. E. I was hooked first by your piece on Ohm. Getting the human background to evolution of these discoveries is wonderful!
reply
Fantastic lecture Kathy! Thank you (I think because I'm sure to spend too much time watching them) As an E. E. I was hooked first by your piece on Ohm. Getting the human background to evolution of these discoveries is wonderful!
reply
Frank
Kathy - I am in the final stages of publishing an important book in which some of your videos are featured. I would love to tell you about it. I am following you on Twitter. #OSAUIA H. Frank Gaertner
reply
Kathy - I am in the final stages of publishing an important book in which some of your videos are featured. I would love to tell you about it. I am following you on Twitter. #OSAUIA H. Frank Gaertner
reply
Soumyadip
It'd actually be very helpful, Kathy, if you provide the links for the research papers you make references to in the descriptions of all your videos. We too would like to read the papers.
reply
It'd actually be very helpful, Kathy, if you provide the links for the research papers you make references to in the descriptions of all your videos. We too would like to read the papers.
reply
Apsteronaldo
Awesome - never knew I should appreciate Bohr to such extent and that he was so clever and a miracle worker with his ideas. It only sounds obvious to us because he made it so clear
reply
Awesome - never knew I should appreciate Bohr to such extent and that he was so clever and a miracle worker with his ideas. It only sounds obvious to us because he made it so clear
reply
Barin
Hey Kathy! I am an old science teacher and I just discovered your videos the other day and have used a couple in my lessons. I'm a big fan of science history. Great story telling!
reply
Hey Kathy! I am an old science teacher and I just discovered your videos the other day and have used a couple in my lessons. I'm a big fan of science history. Great story telling!
reply
Nurul
Never found myself falling in love more and more deeper than today with physics and chemistry and history. I hope I can radiate this pure passion and energy to my entire students.
reply
Never found myself falling in love more and more deeper than today with physics and chemistry and history. I hope I can radiate this pure passion and energy to my entire students.
reply
Nicholas
What a fascinating, entertaining, and delightful lecture on the history of the birth of our modern understanding of the atom. Thank you so much for your presentation.
reply
What a fascinating, entertaining, and delightful lecture on the history of the birth of our modern understanding of the atom. Thank you so much for your presentation.
reply
Jeff
Decades of living and I did not know plums are raisins in England. And I am frankly disappointed, because plum pudding sounds so much better than raisin pudding.
reply
Decades of living and I did not know plums are raisins in England. And I am frankly disappointed, because plum pudding sounds so much better than raisin pudding.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
