Quantum analysis Duca - page 60

New comment
 
Maxim Dmitrievsky:

he wrote a long time ago - for all financial questions in person, i.e. the topic is purely a lure

That's not how baiters work...

 
Alexander_K:

Granddad, try working as a shop keeper - you don't need to know physics there.

Alexander, what if that wizard, for whom you feel such wild nostalgia, has been resurrected?
And you're trying to crucify him (or seven times)...

 
Maxim Dmitrievsky:

He wrote a long time ago - for all financial questions in person, i.e. the topic is purely a lure

Judging by the amount of information from TC on the topic, his reactions and actions, his goal now is to have as many pages of discussion as possible (kind of hype).

To keep anything uncomfortable hidden in the number of pages. Those who are interested will no longer find it easy to read the whole thread, and the personal ones are always open)

After all, if everything was not to lure, and to the point, there would not be his echoes on the comments with virtually no information on the subject, which is REAL already written to him by other forum members.

(yes,yes. this post of mine also fills the thread, which of course now someone wanted to say, but it's just mainly for TC - breeding? or where?)

 
Why is it that all the smartest people understand but can't say anything?
 
Nikolai Semko:

Alexander, what if the wizard you're so nostalgic for has risen?
And you're trying to crucify him...

What about me? On the contrary, I am interested in this topic - it is directly related to my professional education. And I am looking for ideas, new ideas, of course.

But I do not just want a retelling of Dukk's theory, but a qualitative analysis of it - where it comes from and why. I have shown a sample of how to run a thread in my posts.

But, alas, TC is weak - he has no understanding of physics from the word "at all".

But, come on, let him bang on what he has written. If he makes a profit, I'll be glad.

 
Vyacheslav Nekipelov:

Judging by the amount of information from the TC on the topic, his reactions and actions, his goal now is to have as many pages of discussion as possible (kind of a frenzy).

So that anything indecipherable is hidden in the number of pages. It will no longer be easy for those who are interested to read the whole thread, and the personal ones are always open)

There are a lot of you mathematicians too. Alexander_K is alone)))

You should sort out the nuts and bolts

 
Nikolai Semko:

lures work differently...

everyone is different... he ran analytics for many years in DTs with these channels. He was not very popular, although he introduced the concept of quantum analysis.

The more TIC on the subject, the better for the author (at least), then you can do different things with those interested

this is me talking about the methods of advertising on the internet

 
Vyacheslav Nekipelov:

Judging by the amount of information from the TC on the topic, his reactions and actions, his goal now is to have as many pages of discussion as possible (kind of a frenzy).

So that anything indecipherable is hidden in the number of pages. Those who are interested will no longer find it easy to read the whole thread, and the personal ones are always open)

After all, if everything was not to lure, and to the point, it would not be his echoes on comments with virtually no information on the subject, which is REAL already written to him by other forum members.

(yes,yes. this post of mine also fills the thread, which of course now someone wanted to say, but it is just mainly for TC - are we diluting? or where?

that's exactly what I wrote above )

Our job is either to get this topic deleted or no one cares. There is no informative content here, much less useful content
 
Alexander_K:

Let's now try to make sense of Duc's formulas, which he gave his name to:

Now we are interested in the wavelength Lambda=2*r

Let's look at the classical definition:

From de Broglie's formulas we have:

Lambda=(2*Pi*h*n)/p, where

Pi=3.1415926...

h is Planck's constant

n - unit vector in the direction of wave propagation

p - impulse of the particle

In this case, dimensions of the right and left parts of the relation coincide.

In Feynman's problem thespeed of light with (in fact, the speed of a relativistic particle), the mass of the particle m and Planck's constant h =1

In this case the momentum of the particle p=m*c=1.

We obtain:

Lambda=2*Pi*n, where n is unit vector in direction of wave propagation

And in Duk's case wavelengthLambda=2*r.

Where did the number pi disappear to? I don't know... We don't need to look at the theory any further.

You're such a quick résumé...

--- it's a constant. In fact, it's a scaling factor. So don't get hung up on the absence of pi. If you really want to see the number of Pi, it can be very easily achieved by renormalizing the value ofh. In this case it will be a value corresponding in the sense of Planck's constant, but acting already on this scale.

 
Alexander_K:

What about me? On the contrary, I am interested in this topic - it is directly related to my professional education. And I am looking for ideas, new ideas, of course.

But I do not just want a retelling of Dukk's theory, but a qualitative analysis of it - where it comes from and why. I have shown a sample of how to run a thread in my posts.

But, alas, TC is weak - he is not good at physics from the word "at all".

But, come on, let him bang on what he has written. If he makes a profit, I'll be glad.

This is just so that physicists do not forget about Newton's third law, because it works not only in the world of material bodies.

1...535455565758596061626364656667...81
New comment