bookish

atom (read all 12 entries…)
be humble 3 years ago

but not self-effacing

like an atom.

it could be so tiny you can’t see it.
but it’s so powerful when in a bomb.

the power is held in reserve, for when it’s needed.

Feb 03, 2006, 08:42AM PST | 13 cheers


Comments:

Senninha

The goal

of “atom” was so simple, and so enigmatic, that I felt strangely compelled to cheer it!

Feb 04, 2006, 04:16PM PST | Thread | Respond to this 1 cheer

bookish

thank

you!

Feb 08, 2006, 05:50AM PST | Respond to this

(This comment was deleted.)

Feb 09, 2006, 07:12AM PST

bookish

oh my god

PROMISE me, cross your heart, that you will NEVER EVER delete this post.

It will take me some time to reread and digest it all… but Wow.

Feb 09, 2006, 07:16AM PST | Thread | Respond to this

(This comment was deleted.)

Feb 09, 2006, 07:18AM PST

bookish

ya

definitely.

Feb 09, 2006, 07:19AM PST | Respond to this

Michiel. is Michiel is Michiel is Michiel.

WHAT? No! Atoms are not composed of matter and antimatter! Atoms are composed of electrons, protons, and neutrons.

Atoms differ in the number of each of the subatomic particles they contain. The number of protons in an atom determines the element of the atom.

Protons and neutrons are composed of quarks, and electrons are in the class called leptons, which are thought to be a fundamental particle.

I’m sorry, but the first two paragraphs are nonsense from both the classic physics viewpoint and a quantum mechanic viewpoint. The last two paragraphs are interesting but outside my realm of experience.

Here is an overdose of useful atomic and subatomic information, with some antimatter info thrown in for good measure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_particle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lepton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subatomic_particle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter
and why not, some nuclear fusion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion

Feb 23, 2006, 08:31AM PST | Thread | Respond to this 1 cheer

Xenophanes

LOL

Yeah I read the entry and was thinking “Oh no, Dan Brown has a lot to answer for” (he wrote “Angels and Demons”, which amongst other stupid statements says that an electron is the antimatter equivalent of a proton). However, this issue seems already to have been addressed :D

May 03, 2006, 05:39AM PDT | Respond to this

dandv is reading

eilis' post "when you look closer" is crap

Skip the book dude and do some research:
This should be the Bible

Jan 04, 2007, 11:14PM PST | Respond to this


bookish has gotten 13 cheers on this entry.

 

I want to:

The world wants to...

43 Things Login