Some website about new Bohr model

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter HAYAO
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bohr Bohr model Model
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a new interpretation of the Bohr model proposed by an individual who claims it can accurately calculate the energy levels of helium and other noble gases, as well as chemical bonds, without relying on quantum mechanics or relativity. The scope includes theoretical implications and the validity of this model in the context of established physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant introduces a website discussing a new Bohr model that claims to provide accurate calculations for atomic energies and bonds at a non-relativistic level.
  • The proposer of the model reportedly denies the validity of quantum mechanics and relativity, suggesting a return to a classical interpretation of atomic structure.
  • Another participant expresses anticipation for the model's first paper to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, implying a potential for significant recognition.
  • A later reply questions whether the previous comment was sarcastic, indicating skepticism about the model's scientific merit.
  • One participant notes that discussions of pseudoscience are not permitted, leading to the closure of the thread.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the validity and scientific merit of the proposed model, with some expressing skepticism and others showing interest in its potential. The discussion remains unresolved, particularly concerning the model's acceptance within the scientific community.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the lack of formal education in physics among some participants, which may affect their ability to critically assess the proposed model. There is also an indication of uncertainty regarding the classification of the model as pseudoscience.

HAYAO
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
381
Reaction score
238
This website <link removed> by some Japanese guy talks about a new Bohr model that can accurately calculate energy of Helium and other noble gases, as well as bonds, in non-relativistic level. (I happened to come across this website when I was searching about spinor.) He also reviews why old Bohr's model failed when he proposed it.

This guy openly denies quantum mechanics (and relativity), and explains that by reconsidering Bohr's model into a new, classically intuitive orbital, he has successfully derived an atomic model that can accurately calculate the energies and etc, without having to have to worry too much about many-body problem.

I am not a theoretical physicist nor someone who has taken formal education in physics so I cannot seem to understand the validity of his theory (I am a chemist). I am unsure whether this is a good place or not to start for this guy to work on this fundamental theory. I am just wondering, without bias, from the physicist's point of view on his theory. Do you think with some work, this model can be refined to create a new theory of atoms and etc, or do you think there are too many fundamental problems that it won't be any good no matter how this guy attempt refining it.

Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to deny quantum mechanics or QFT or SR & GR, or anything. I lack physical background to be able to do that.P.S. Dear moderators, if you find this thread inappropriate, please delete or move this to more appropriate place. I did make sure that this topic was never discussed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Great news, will look forward to reading his first paper on it in a peer reviewed and reputable physics journal.

Sounds like a Nobel prize for sure.
 
houlahound said:
Great news, will look forward to reading his first paper on it in a peer reviewed and reputable physics journal.

Sounds like a Nobel prize for sure.
I hope it's a sarcasm. :biggrin:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: houlahound
Discussion of pseudoscience is not allowed at PF, even to debunk it.

Thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

High School Clarification about Bohr's atomic model
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad Why the energy inversely propotional to n^2 in Bohr model
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School How is Bohr's atom model convenient with quantum mechanics?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
High School Pilot-wave is No More, Pilot-wave cracked by Bohr
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Graduate Did Bohr have a Logical Picture of Wittgenstein?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Graduate Bohr's solution to the EPR paradox
  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
11K
Rutherford model of atom and Bohr model
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Bohr vs Einstein: is the Moon there when we are not looking?
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
20K
Undergrad Question About Bohr's Quantified Shell Model
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Graduate A general question about quantum physics
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K