Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

## Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow

 To: Hardy Landskov , "amps@contesting.com" Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow "Fuqua, Bill L" Sun, 20 Nov 2016 21:43:53 +0000 mailto:amps@contesting.com>
 ``` It is not uncertain. His first paper established an absolute limit of resolution of position and momentum or time and energy. However, this discovery was what got him the Nobel Prize. However, this conclusion did not fit into the current quantum mechanical methods. So he had to redo it in terms of probabilities assuming Gaussian statistics. That trough in a factor of 1/4*PI. In his first paper he stated that delta x *delta p >h and the statistical model became standard deviation of x * standard deviation of P>h/4PI Standard deviation is indicated by a lower case sigma. This is when it became the uncertainty principle. Both are correct. However, just about all text books have replaced sigma with delta. Delta and Sigma have quite different meanings. in this case a factor of 4PI. They all have it as delta x *delta p >h/4PI (wrong). 73 Bill wa4lav ________________________________________ From: Hardy Landskov [n7rt@cox.net] Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 4:25 PM To: Fuqua, Bill L; amps@contesting.com Subject: RE: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow Bill, So the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is still uncertain? I feel it's obvious once the process is measured, the process is changed. The main bang in my bag is gravity. What is it??? 73 N7RT -----Original Message----- From: Amps [mailto:amps-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Fuqua, Bill L Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 4:11 PM To: amps@contesting.com Subject: Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow Actually Max Planck was the father of Quantum Mechanics (quantum physics). He determined that photons, he did not name them then, carried the energy from one atom to another. This knowledge led to a better understanding of atomic, nuclear, and condensed matter ( solid state) physics. Now, about Heisenberg, He didn't even refer to uncertainty principle in his initial paper. In fact he had to go do his math over again so that it was consistent with quantum mechanics. What is more interesting is that most text books today have HUP wrong! Here is one for you, who discovered the photo electric effect? The answer may surprise you. 73 Bill wa4lav _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps ```
 Current Thread Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, (continued) Message not availableMessage not availableRe: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Mike Waters Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Larry Dighera Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Mike Waters Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Bill Turner Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Kevin Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Kim Elmore Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Ken Durand Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, donroden Message not availableRe: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Fuqua, Bill L Message not availableMessage not availableRe: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Hardy Landskov Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Fuqua, Bill L <= Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Jim Garland Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Charles H Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Bill Turner Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Charles H Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Bob Moody Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Bill Turner Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, donroden Message not availableRe: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Larry Dighera Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Mike Waters Re: [Amps] "Conventional" current flow, Jerry O. Stern