It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

For the First Time Ever, Scientists Watch an Atom's Electrons Moving in Real Time

page: 3
42
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by timepolarity


Which is why my reply is 'not quite.' You obviously have a logical mind and a fair amount of IQ to think of this subject in the way you have.

I want to be able to get people to see the world the way I do. Quantum mechanics is not such a hard subject to get your head around, as I mentioned earlier it's all a matter of perspective.

Keep up the thirst for knowledge!!



Korg.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by Korg Trinity]




posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
This is great news and shows the complexity fo what is happening at sub atomic level.

I still wonder whether what we find at this level is actually the reality. "Our" reality has been so heavily processed by our brain that it actually could not be anything like the real world, our brain being responsible for the Laws of motion not the outside world.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Korg Trinity

Originally posted by timepolarity



I want to be able to get people to see the world the way I do. Quantum mechanics is not such a hard subject to get your head around, as I mentioned earlier it's all a matter of perspective.

Keep up the thirst for knowledge!!



Korg.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by Korg Trinity]


I have been following Quantum mechanics for years now, I have an understanding to a degree, from 88-2000 I lived in the Berkeley Hills just below the Berkeley Lab, could see their parking lot, always wanted to go there but regret that I didn't, many of the scientists are very open and willing to tell you about their work.

Thank you again for sharing your knowledge.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by 19872012
 





I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics. ~ Richard Feynman





"The electron does anything it likes," he said. "It just goes in any direction at any speed, forward or backward in time, however it likes, and then you add up the amplitudes and it gives you the wave-function.-Richard Feynman


You are not alone friend.

You are not alone.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 





Through a process called attosecond absorption spectroscopy, researchers were able to time the oscillations between simultaneously produced quantum states of valence electrons with great precision. These oscillations drive electron motion.


My proctologist wanted to do this same thing to me and I told him no!

Eventually we are bound to figure out the ‘glue’ that holds what we perceive as solid physically together, which I am certain under our present system, will only lead to another tax.

Pay the tax or we simply dissolve and rearrange your immediate environment and you along with it.

I still think for the most part science is metaphysics for dummies, and that we aren’t meant to understand the mechanics through science, but our own perceptional awareness of the universe and ourselves.

If science figures this all out before the average human can learn to work it out in their own mind, it is bound to be used against people for the purpose of domination, that is to say, if it already isn’t being used in that fashion now.

Very interesting post Aquarius1.

Starred and flagged.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


I still think for the most part science is metaphysics for dummies, and that we aren’t meant to understand the mechanics through science, but our own perceptional awareness of the universe and ourselves.



i really liked this quote.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



I still think for the most part science is metaphysics for dummies, and that we aren’t meant to understand the mechanics through science, but our own perceptional awareness of the universe and ourselves.


Thank you my friend, you always have a way of putting things into perspective for us dummies.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aquarius1
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



I still think for the most part science is metaphysics for dummies, and that we aren’t meant to understand the mechanics through science, but our own perceptional awareness of the universe and ourselves.


Thank you my friend, you always have a way of putting things into perspective for us dummies.


Funny you should mention that, I am conducting some vehicle crash tests today and am short a few...!

To better clarify before Phage decides he needs talk therapy, a certain type of person has a greater reliance on the external processes than the internal processes, and a greater belief in the external than the internal.

Conceptually they can only validate what they can see through external stimuli.

I favor a more balanced approach that integrates both modalities.

Anyway about this test, no big deal it's just a full frontal impact right offset pillar contact point at 120 miles an hour.

Pays minimum wage!



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   
I used to be CEO of a flat panel display company. A friend of mine was CEO of a competing company. Over lunch one day, he told me that his hobby was "sub-atomic particle" construction.

He said that he had "proven" that all sub-atomic particles (electron, proton, neutron, photon, etc.) were composed of 10 to the 26 sub particles. I never saw that he had published his "proof" results, but what he said has always haunted me.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   
In response to the simulation hypothesis...

Nick Bostrom is a big proponent of the simulation hypothesis. He's done some calculations involving the size of our universe and the probability of intelligent life on other planets, and the odds that a few species have such advanced technology that they could run an infinite amount of simulations.

The fact that SU5 theory proposes parallel universes increases the probability of a highly advanced civilization running an infinite amount of ancestor simulations, is put at a whopping 20%.

If there is an infinite amount of universes (which SU5 theory suggests), I would say that the the probability that we are in a simulation is at or close to 100%, because all outcomes would have occurred. We are not likely to be one of the conscious beings that are *not* in a simulation. If we were not in a simulation, our reality would probably be a lot different. I personally can predict with about 90% accuracy, things that will happen in the future based on past outcomes. One time someone from my college physics class, came up to me and asked me to predict the outcome of a heads-tails experiment with a coin. He had the coin (there's a way to cheat the system and guess correctly if you yourself flip the coin). He flipped the coin ten times and I guessed correctly all ten times. This frightened him. The odds of this happening are 0.0009765625%. I could have just gotten lucky, but something always pops into my mind before I make a guess. Call it intuition or being lucky, my experience suggests a simulation that runs in a very specific way.

The 20% percentage for the simulation hypothesis is higher than any other existence hypothesis.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by tylerdurden89
 


Isn't it a fact that we didn't know we were in a Galaxy until 1990 with Hubble, these are all theories with no proof how vast the Universe is or how many there are, it does seem to be infinite.


hubblesite.org...



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


Isn't it true that erverthing in the Universe is only graphics. None of the theories can be proven, because they cannot be tested -- perhaps it/we are only MATH.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by etcorngods
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


Isn't it true that erverthing in the Universe is only graphics. None of the theories can be proven, because they cannot be tested -- perhaps it/we are only MATH.



Shhhhhhhhhh!

Second line: Was that Dolly Parton that just went by?????



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Everything is made of atoms, atoms consist of only 30% matter and 70% empty space. The only reason why we perceive things as differen objects is because the atoms in me, you, your computer and everything else are all vibrating at different frequencies.

Our reality is simply an illusion through perception.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
It's simple in my view.
The electron is made up of energy, it has no body or anything like that, no shell, it's just energy.
This explains it very good.


Energy can expand or focus, it's really light that makes it behave like a particle, or else we get an wave interference pattern. In other words it becomes a particle wherever light is present on it. It's not about observation, for observation to take place light needs to be shined on the electron. It's light causing interference with the wave, We really live in an ocean of waves, light makes it solid.

It's mutation on everything we look around, any level, water will turn into vapors or coluds if heat is applied, or it can turn into ice. Normal state of matter is water from there it can go to minus or plus, minus to ice plus to vapor. Cells can mutate, everything can mutate and is flexible, particles included, from waves to particles, and from particles back to waves.


In my idea anything can travel as thin air sort of speak.
I think of water for example transforming into clouds as a teleportation method. Water traveling as humidity in the air and forming as clouds above the lake.

Nothing is what it seems to be, and as for the electron it's the water in the lake that turns into a cloud once light shines on it. In the case of water it's heat that makes it mutate into a cloud, in the case of the electron it's light that makes it act like a particle.

I think this is the most simplest explenation not for others but for me to try to get a picture on the electron.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


Thank you for the video and information, interesting, love to see the visuals at times opposed to the written word.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Nice post! I wouldn't say that they saw electrons "moving" in realtime. It's more like a stop-motion effect as they took quick snapshots of their current quantum state. Yes, a "movie" is nothing more than a quick succession of snapshots, but that is not the same as watching them "move" in the sense that electrons are not flying through space like a pool ball.

If we could simultaneously observe both the position and the speed of an electron (which the Heisenberg uncertainty principle says we cannot), then I would say that we could truly watch an electron "move in realtime".

That being said, it is pleasantly amazing how far our technology has advanced to allow us to take these kinds of measurements. It's a great time to be alive, no matter how fleeting our existence may be.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Blazer
 


Indeed it's a great time to be alive, it blows my mind to think of what has happened so far in my life time, looking forward to so much more before it time for me to leave the planet.

Thank you for posting.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by tylerdurden89
One time someone from my college physics class, came up to me and asked me to predict the outcome of a heads-tails experiment with a coin. He had the coin (there's a way to cheat the system and guess correctly if you yourself flip the coin). He flipped the coin ten times and I guessed correctly all ten times. This frightened him. The odds of this happening are 0.0009765625%. I could have just gotten lucky, but something always pops into my mind before I make a guess.


Another person claiming they have a "power". Why don't you make this same demonstration to James Randi, and collect the one million dollar prize?



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Blazer
 


Now James Randi is a joke, he weasels his way out of that one million dollars that he more then likely doesn't have..haven't followed him for years but remember the so called UFO fiasco he did in Vegas a number of years back, he charged people money to observe nothing.




top topics



 
42
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join