.....

Humans allways need to have an opinion, regardless if they know anything about the stuff or not. Your opinions are more precious to you than seeking for the facts.
By the way, aren't you the guy from this series, which mixed photon torpedos with pregalileian physics?

Scepi do you know what a NUCLEUS is? Do you know where the term NUCLEAR comes from? facepalm.gif

scepti only believes in the admittedly flawed FAQ.
everything else is fake.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, give me an example of the simplest form of "radioactive" in your mind and tell me what it does.

Well, let's take tritium for example.  Tritium is an unstable isotope of hydrogen.  This means that from time to time a tritium atom will undergo what scientists call beta decay (a type of radiation) and it turns into a form of helium.  During this decay process, an electron is released which can be used to excite phosphor causing it to glow.  This is how tritium glow lights work.

Now, do you accept that this is what's going on in the tritium glow light, or do you think that the scientists and tritium glow light manufacturers are lying and something else is going on?

Quote from: markjo on March 01, 2013, 06:29:57 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 28, 2013, 11:00:27 AM

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, give me an example of the simplest form of "radioactive" in your mind and tell me what it does.

Well, let's take tritium for example.  Tritium is an unstable isotope of hydrogen.  This means that from time to time a tritium atom will undergo what scientists call beta decay (a type of radiation) and it turns into a form of helium.  During this decay process, an electron is released which can be used to excite phosphor causing it to glow.  This is how tritium glow lights work.

Now, do you accept that this is what's going on in the tritium glow light, or do you think that the scientists and tritium glow light manufacturers are lying and something else is going on?

I don't accept tritium either.

Then what causes tritium glow lights to glow?

Quote from: markjo on March 01, 2013, 06:29:57 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 28, 2013, 11:00:27 AM

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, give me an example of the simplest form of "radioactive" in your mind and tell me what it does.

Well, let's take tritium for example.  Tritium is an unstable isotope of hydrogen.  This means that from time to time a tritium atom will undergo what scientists call beta decay (a type of radiation) and it turns into a form of helium.  During this decay process, an electron is released which can be used to excite phosphor causing it to glow.  This is how tritium glow lights work.

Now, do you accept that this is what's going on in the tritium glow light, or do you think that the scientists and tritium glow light manufacturers are lying and something else is going on?

I don't accept tritium either.

what a surprise

Quote from: markjo on March 01, 2013, 07:12:16 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 01, 2013, 06:53:22 AM

Quote from: markjo on March 01, 2013, 06:29:57 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 28, 2013, 11:00:27 AM

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, give me an example of the simplest form of "radioactive" in your mind and tell me what it does.

Well, let's take tritium for example.  Tritium is an unstable isotope of hydrogen.  This means that from time to time a tritium atom will undergo what scientists call beta decay (a type of radiation) and it turns into a form of helium.  During this decay process, an electron is released which can be used to excite phosphor causing it to glow.  This is how tritium glow lights work.

Now, do you accept that this is what's going on in the tritium glow light, or do you think that the scientists and tritium glow light manufacturers are lying and something else is going on?

I don't accept tritium either.

Then what causes tritium glow lights to glow?

I don't know what causes tritium lights to glow because tritium supposedly only comes from nuclear power.
Just simply chemical reactions of substances. Not big fissioning nuclear reactions, which is what I was on about in the first place.

Then what about radium?  It was one of the first radioactive elements discovered back in 1898, long before any nuclear power.  Radium was also widely used in self-luminous paint applications.

Quote from: markjo on March 01, 2013, 07:42:40 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 01, 2013, 07:17:51 AM

Quote from: markjo on March 01, 2013, 07:12:16 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 01, 2013, 06:53:22 AM

Quote from: markjo on March 01, 2013, 06:29:57 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 28, 2013, 11:00:27 AM

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, give me an example of the simplest form of "radioactive" in your mind and tell me what it does.

Well, let's take tritium for example.  Tritium is an unstable isotope of hydrogen.  This means that from time to time a tritium atom will undergo what scientists call beta decay (a type of radiation) and it turns into a form of helium.  During this decay process, an electron is released which can be used to excite phosphor causing it to glow.  This is how tritium glow lights work.

Now, do you accept that this is what's going on in the tritium glow light, or do you think that the scientists and tritium glow light manufacturers are lying and something else is going on?

I don't accept tritium either.

Then what causes tritium glow lights to glow?

I don't know what causes tritium lights to glow because tritium supposedly only comes from nuclear power.
Just simply chemical reactions of substances. Not big fissioning nuclear reactions, which is what I was on about in the first place.

Then what about radium?  It was one of the first radioactive elements discovered back in 1898, long before any nuclear power.  Radium was also widely used in self-luminous paint applications.

Let's just clarify something.
There will be plenty of stuff in the medical field and in life that use chemical reactions and luminous effects due to reactions and that's fair enough.

My struggle is with the energy gained from metal pellets that simply sit there slinging neutrons backwards and forwards at atoms and creating more and more and more and super heating water for a decade in the process and yet it's still only supposedly using 10% of it's energy.

So asking me about other reactions that do not do what this does, is pointless.

Radium produces the same radiation as uranium in a nuclear reactor it is just not fissile.  Its not a chemical reaction, its a nuclear reaction.  All alpha, beta and gamma radiation is nuclear and it exists widely outside of nuclear reactors.  A nuclear reactor is a specific technological application of nuclear radioactivity.

I am talking about "fissioning" nuclear power as we are told happens inside nuclear reactors.

I know and you seem to think that it is a special case that has different rules than all the other radioactive examples in the world.  Nuclear Reactors are not special examples of radioactivity that can be separated from other form of radioactivity, with different laws governing it.  Fission is just a specific way to apply radioactivity.  Just like superconducting is a specific way to apply conductivity.  There is no mystery here, it is well understood and well documented.

Quote from: Rama Set on March 01, 2013, 08:12:00 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 01, 2013, 08:06:57 AM

I am talking about "fissioning" nuclear power as we are told happens inside nuclear reactors.

I know and you seem to think that it is a special case that has different rules than all the other radioactive examples in the world.  Nuclear Reactors are not special examples of radioactivity that can be separated from other form of radioactivity, with different laws governing it.  Fission is just a specific way to apply radioactivity.  Just like superconducting is a specific way to apply conductivity.  There is no mystery here, it is well understood and well documented.

Of course there's no mystery, if you accept it all as gospel.

That is an Ad Hominem fallacy. 

I am talking about "fissioning" nuclear power as we are told happens inside nuclear reactors.

Fission is merely a heavy atom splitting into 2 or more lighter atoms and, in the process, releasing energy.  This can occur naturally or it can be helped along.  Nuclear reactors are merely a man made way of helping the process along in a (hopefully) controlled manner while harnessing the energy released.

I am talking about "fissioning" nuclear power as we are told happens inside nuclear reactors.

Do you accept Einstein's mass-energy equivalence (E=mc^2) as given by relativity?

Quote from: markjo on March 01, 2013, 12:57:10 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 01, 2013, 08:06:57 AM

I am talking about "fissioning" nuclear power as we are told happens inside nuclear reactors.

Fission is merely a heavy atom splitting into 2 or more lighter atoms and, in the process, releasing energy.  This can occur naturally or it can be helped along.  Nuclear reactors are merely a man made way of helping the process along in a (hopefully) controlled manner while harnessing the energy released.

Markojo:
I understand what you are trying to say and I know what we are told but have a think about it.
Neutrons smashing into atoms and splitting them and they go on to split again and again releasing all this so called energy under their own steam.
They supposedly smash into each other and split, yet somehow this creates massive heat for some reason.
Now if it was molecules under agitated friction by the sun or some means of energy put into it, I'd accept it , but it isn't, it's a magical fissioning process that merely bounces around smacking into other atoms and splitting them.
The concept of it sounds magical and to most it's an evil wonder of science genius, yet to me it's an evil story made up to serve a number of purposes, good and bad.

It's simple conceptually. The mathematics are complicated.

Neutrons smashing into atoms and splitting them and they go on to split again and again releasing all this so called energy under their own steam.

Actually, the chain reaction of neutrons splitting atoms generally only occurs when the concentration of radioactive material is fairly high.  And even then, only certain isotopes of certain elements can be split by a neutron.  In radioactive ores found in nature, the concentration of unstable atoms is generally low enough where they just go through their natural decay process.

They supposedly smash into each other and split, yet somehow this creates massive heat for some reason.

When an atomic nucleus splits, a certain amount of energy is released in the form of heat.  With a controlled chain reaction, quite a bit of heat energy can be released.  In an uncontrolled chain reaction, you can get a rather powerful bomb.

The concept of it sounds magical and to most it's an evil wonder of science genius, yet to me it's an evil story made up to serve a number of purposes, good and bad.

Again, it only sounds magical because you can't (or don't want to) understand.  Besides, if nuclear bombs are so fake, then why do countries like Iran and North Korea want them so badly?

Quote from: Idreyn on March 01, 2013, 04:22:15 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 01, 2013, 08:06:57 AM

I am talking about "fissioning" nuclear power as we are told happens inside nuclear reactors.

Do you accept Einstein's mass-energy equivalence (E=mc^2) as given by relativity?

Absolutely not. It's hogwash to me and simply a made up equation to cater for the crap we have to swallow in life.

Alright, whatever. But what exactly do you think holds the nucleus of an atom together? Peanut butter?





I'll give you a hint. It's not peanut butter. It's the strong nuclear force.

you can see atoms under a microscopic. who told you you couldn't?
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/jul/16/electron-microscope-sees-single-hydrogen-atoms

and you can see the results of neutrinos with neutrino detectors
http://lbne.fnal.gov/neutrino-detectors.shtml

oh so i have to of actually seen them myself to know they are real. iv never seen you before but unfortunately i do believe you are real.

you constantly come back to this " have you seen it with your own eyes" statment. have you ever seen a episode of Eastenders being filmed with you own eyes? no? then how do you know its not in fact a fly on the wall documentary of a real place in east London?

have you ever seen a factory making chocolate milk with your own eyes? no? then how do you know cows cant produce chocolate milk?

we could go on. you just accept these things because you have been told by people in their respected fields that this is the case. but you have no problems with these 2 statements do you? so why do you with anything regarding science and scientific experiments? because they are to complex for you to understand? thats not an insult. many people don't understand many hard to grasp scientific facts. but for you to then say these people are wrong and even that they are directly lying to us all is just blind ignorance on your behalf

no i don't know who it was and what do you mean by discover? 1st theorize about their existence or 1st to directly observe their existence or a consequence of their existance

well i will wait for your findings.

i said in my last post i don't know. let me know when you find out.

You make this look like a chat. Idreyn asked to scepti what is holding atoms together. and now scepti is questioning weather or not atoms exist. why didnt you say that from the beggining? You can also use google or wikipedia to find that kind of information.

Apparently, this is how it went.

1.....400 B.C. Democritus’ atomic theory posited that all matter is made up small indestructible units he called atoms.

2...1903    Hantaro Nagaoka proposed an atomic model called the Saturnian Model to describe the structure of an atom.

3....In 1955 Professor of Physics, Erwin Mueller, became the 1st person to see an atom, using a field ion microscope of his own design.
.....................................................................................
1938     Lise Meitner, Hahn, Strassman discovered nuclear fission.
1942      Enrico Fermi created the first man-made nuclear reactor.
......................................................................................



So here's how it all works.
You get someone sat on a rock (probably) looking about on the beach and maybe sees a grain of sand and thinks, "hmmm, there's something smaller than this and smaller and smaller...maybe something like an atom.... right , I haven't a clue what to do about this but I'll write it down on my note pad and leave it in my safe so it gets passed down, because I'm sure this thought will come in handy one day when I'm just floating dust myself."

Years and years down the line, someone comes along and thinks, " I think i'll make a structure up of atoms that I have never seen...here we go, all done."

Years later, someone knocks up a nuclear reactor by smashing atoms and splitting them, blindly, creating a reaction of Nuclear proportions.

Years later, messing about with a microscope that he builds himself..Erwin, sees an atom, that he really didn't need to see , because people already knew how to split them and do all sorts with them with their eyes closed.

Right ladies and gentlemen, I want you all to close your eyes and split some atoms. First one to do so and create a chain reaction, gets a home made, direct from the cow, chocolate milk shake. 

Yes or no, do you doubt the existence of atoms?

Apparently, this is how it went.

1.....400 B.C. Democritus’ atomic theory posited that all matter is made up small indestructible units he called atoms.

2...1903    Hantaro Nagaoka proposed an atomic model called the Saturnian Model to describe the structure of an atom.

3....In 1955 Professor of Physics, Erwin Mueller, became the 1st person to see an atom, using a field ion microscope of his own design.
.....................................................................................
1938     Lise Meitner, Hahn, Strassman discovered nuclear fission.
1942      Enrico Fermi created the first man-made nuclear reactor.
......................................................................................



So here's how it all works.
You get someone sat on a rock (probably) looking about on the beach and maybe sees a grain of sand and thinks, "hmmm, there's something smaller than this and smaller and smaller...maybe something like an atom.... right , I haven't a clue what to do about this but I'll write it down on my note pad and leave it in my safe so it gets passed down, because I'm sure this thought will come in handy one day when I'm just floating dust myself."

Years and years down the line, someone comes along and thinks, " I think i'll make a structure up of atoms that I have never seen...here we go, all done."

Years later, someone knocks up a nuclear reactor by smashing atoms and splitting them, blindly, creating a reaction of Nuclear proportions.

Years later, messing about with a microscope that he builds himself..Erwin, sees an atom, that he really didn't need to see , because people already knew how to split them and do all sorts with them with their eyes closed.

Right ladies and gentlemen, I want you all to close your eyes and split some atoms. First one to do so and create a chain reaction, gets a home made, direct from the cow, chocolate milk shake. 

People could make all sorts of indentifixations about even sub atomic particles well before the nuclear reactor. Their mass, spin, charge light spectra and on and on. You want to put a premium on visual identification for some reason. Way to exclude blind people.

Quote from: Bollybill on March 03, 2013, 02:43:41 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2013, 02:39:19 PM

Apparently, this is how it went.

1.....400 B.C. Democritus’ atomic theory posited that all matter is made up small indestructible units he called atoms.

2...1903    Hantaro Nagaoka proposed an atomic model called the Saturnian Model to describe the structure of an atom.

3....In 1955 Professor of Physics, Erwin Mueller, became the 1st person to see an atom, using a field ion microscope of his own design.
.....................................................................................
1938     Lise Meitner, Hahn, Strassman discovered nuclear fission.
1942      Enrico Fermi created the first man-made nuclear reactor.
......................................................................................



So here's how it all works.
You get someone sat on a rock (probably) looking about on the beach and maybe sees a grain of sand and thinks, "hmmm, there's something smaller than this and smaller and smaller...maybe something like an atom.... right , I haven't a clue what to do about this but I'll write it down on my note pad and leave it in my safe so it gets passed down, because I'm sure this thought will come in handy one day when I'm just floating dust myself."

Years and years down the line, someone comes along and thinks, " I think i'll make a structure up of atoms that I have never seen...here we go, all done."

Years later, someone knocks up a nuclear reactor by smashing atoms and splitting them, blindly, creating a reaction of Nuclear proportions.

Years later, messing about with a microscope that he builds himself..Erwin, sees an atom, that he really didn't need to see , because people already knew how to split them and do all sorts with them with their eyes closed.

Right ladies and gentlemen, I want you all to close your eyes and split some atoms. First one to do so and create a chain reaction, gets a home made, direct from the cow, chocolate milk shake. 

Yes or no, do you doubt the existence of atoms?

That's a tricky question to be honest.

I doubt the existence of something that they call atoms that miraculously create energy with no input.

So, no?

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2013, 02:48:53 PM

Quote from: Bollybill on March 03, 2013, 02:43:41 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2013, 02:39:19 PM

Apparently, this is how it went.

1.....400 B.C. Democritus’ atomic theory posited that all matter is made up small indestructible units he called atoms.

2...1903    Hantaro Nagaoka proposed an atomic model called the Saturnian Model to describe the structure of an atom.

3....In 1955 Professor of Physics, Erwin Mueller, became the 1st person to see an atom, using a field ion microscope of his own design.
.....................................................................................
1938     Lise Meitner, Hahn, Strassman discovered nuclear fission.
1942      Enrico Fermi created the first man-made nuclear reactor.
......................................................................................



So here's how it all works.
You get someone sat on a rock (probably) looking about on the beach and maybe sees a grain of sand and thinks, "hmmm, there's something smaller than this and smaller and smaller...maybe something like an atom.... right , I haven't a clue what to do about this but I'll write it down on my note pad and leave it in my safe so it gets passed down, because I'm sure this thought will come in handy one day when I'm just floating dust myself."

Years and years down the line, someone comes along and thinks, " I think i'll make a structure up of atoms that I have never seen...here we go, all done."

Years later, someone knocks up a nuclear reactor by smashing atoms and splitting them, blindly, creating a reaction of Nuclear proportions.

Years later, messing about with a microscope that he builds himself..Erwin, sees an atom, that he really didn't need to see , because people already knew how to split them and do all sorts with them with their eyes closed.

Right ladies and gentlemen, I want you all to close your eyes and split some atoms. First one to do so and create a chain reaction, gets a home made, direct from the cow, chocolate milk shake. 

Yes or no, do you doubt the existence of atoms?

That's a tricky question to be honest.

I doubt the existence of something that they call atoms that miraculously create energy with no input.

So, no?

They don't create energy from nothing.

Quote from: Rama Set on March 03, 2013, 02:55:13 PM

Quote from: Bollybill on March 03, 2013, 02:50:46 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2013, 02:48:53 PM

Quote from: Bollybill on March 03, 2013, 02:43:41 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2013, 02:39:19 PM

Apparently, this is how it went.

1.....400 B.C. Democritus’ atomic theory posited that all matter is made up small indestructible units he called atoms.

2...1903    Hantaro Nagaoka proposed an atomic model called the Saturnian Model to describe the structure of an atom.

3....In 1955 Professor of Physics, Erwin Mueller, became the 1st person to see an atom, using a field ion microscope of his own design.
.....................................................................................
1938     Lise Meitner, Hahn, Strassman discovered nuclear fission.
1942      Enrico Fermi created the first man-made nuclear reactor.
......................................................................................



So here's how it all works.
You get someone sat on a rock (probably) looking about on the beach and maybe sees a grain of sand and thinks, "hmmm, there's something smaller than this and smaller and smaller...maybe something like an atom.... right , I haven't a clue what to do about this but I'll write it down on my note pad and leave it in my safe so it gets passed down, because I'm sure this thought will come in handy one day when I'm just floating dust myself."

Years and years down the line, someone comes along and thinks, " I think i'll make a structure up of atoms that I have never seen...here we go, all done."

Years later, someone knocks up a nuclear reactor by smashing atoms and splitting them, blindly, creating a reaction of Nuclear proportions.

Years later, messing about with a microscope that he builds himself..Erwin, sees an atom, that he really didn't need to see , because people already knew how to split them and do all sorts with them with their eyes closed.

Right ladies and gentlemen, I want you all to close your eyes and split some atoms. First one to do so and create a chain reaction, gets a home made, direct from the cow, chocolate milk shake. 

Yes or no, do you doubt the existence of atoms?

That's a tricky question to be honest.

I doubt the existence of something that they call atoms that miraculously create energy with no input.

So, no?

They don't create energy from nothing.

Once you roll the ball down the endless steep hill, it rolls and rolls with the slightest of input.

Not sure what you mean here.

Quote from: Rama Set on March 03, 2013, 02:57:46 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2013, 02:56:28 PM

Quote from: Rama Set on March 03, 2013, 02:55:13 PM

Quote from: Bollybill on March 03, 2013, 02:50:46 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2013, 02:48:53 PM

Quote from: Bollybill on March 03, 2013, 02:43:41 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2013, 02:39:19 PM

Apparently, this is how it went.

1.....400 B.C. Democritus’ atomic theory posited that all matter is made up small indestructible units he called atoms.

2...1903    Hantaro Nagaoka proposed an atomic model called the Saturnian Model to describe the structure of an atom.

3....In 1955 Professor of Physics, Erwin Mueller, became the 1st person to see an atom, using a field ion microscope of his own design.
.....................................................................................
1938     Lise Meitner, Hahn, Strassman discovered nuclear fission.
1942      Enrico Fermi created the first man-made nuclear reactor.
......................................................................................



So here's how it all works.
You get someone sat on a rock (probably) looking about on the beach and maybe sees a grain of sand and thinks, "hmmm, there's something smaller than this and smaller and smaller...maybe something like an atom.... right , I haven't a clue what to do about this but I'll write it down on my note pad and leave it in my safe so it gets passed down, because I'm sure this thought will come in handy one day when I'm just floating dust myself."

Years and years down the line, someone comes along and thinks, " I think i'll make a structure up of atoms that I have never seen...here we go, all done."

Years later, someone knocks up a nuclear reactor by smashing atoms and splitting them, blindly, creating a reaction of Nuclear proportions.

Years later, messing about with a microscope that he builds himself..Erwin, sees an atom, that he really didn't need to see , because people already knew how to split them and do all sorts with them with their eyes closed.

Right ladies and gentlemen, I want you all to close your eyes and split some atoms. First one to do so and create a chain reaction, gets a home made, direct from the cow, chocolate milk shake. 

Yes or no, do you doubt the existence of atoms?

That's a tricky question to be honest.

I doubt the existence of something that they call atoms that miraculously create energy with no input.

So, no?

They don't create energy from nothing.

Once you roll the ball down the endless steep hill, it rolls and rolls with the slightest of input.

Not sure what you mean here.

Let's take the nuclear reactor scenario.
You put in your rods...move the control rods slightly and somehow the atoms start attacking each other and creating heat for years and years continuously.
It's all based on fantasy.

Eventually the fuel runs out though. Why do you think the fuel should be spent quickly?  There are probably trillions and trillions of atoms in the uranium fuel and nuclear fission is, by many times, the most efficient way to extract energy from fuel.

Apparently, this is how it went.

1.....400 B.C. Democritus’ atomic theory posited that all matter is made up small indestructible units he called atoms.

2...1903    Hantaro Nagaoka proposed an atomic model called the Saturnian Model to describe the structure of an atom.

3....In 1955 Professor of Physics, Erwin Mueller, became the 1st person to see an atom, using a field ion microscope of his own design.
.....................................................................................
1938     Lise Meitner, Hahn, Strassman discovered nuclear fission.
1942      Enrico Fermi created the first man-made nuclear reactor.
......................................................................................

Not quite, that's a fairly simplistic view of how it went.

1. First eastern concept of atomism dates back to Indian Jainism in ~6th century BC.

2. First western concept of atomism is 5th Century BC, by Leucippus (Democritus' teacher).

3. Democritus systematises Leucippus' views, and coined the phrase atom. (Well the greek word atomos IIRC)

4. Robert Boyle expands on corpuscularianism in the mid 17th century.

5. Newton then uses corpuscularianism in his theory on light in the 1670's.

6. The chemist Lavoisier defines elements as substances that can't be broken down further in mid/end 18th century.

7. John Dalton uses atomism in the early 19th century, to describe how elements always react in whole number ratios. Leading him to postulate a hypothesis that ultimately leads to atomic theory.

8. At around the same time Robert Brown is looking into Brownian motion.

9. Brownian motion is analysed by Einstein in early 20th century.

10. Einstein's work is then used by Jean Perrin to experimentally verify Daltons hypothesis.

11. Mendeleev publishes his first version of the periodic table of elements.

I think I could describe another 20-30 (still wouldn't be everyone) notable individuals who contributed to atomic theory. But I'll need to get to the rest of my science history/text books which involves getting a step-ladder. My wife's asleep and I'm not sure she'll appreciate the noise of bringing it in through the bedroom door to the garden.

Ta Ta

You might as well add Donald Duck into it and Mickey and Minnie, because it's all an absolute joke.

I look forward to your alternative theory for the composition of matter!

Toodles