sci.physics.electromag

N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) wrote:
> "FrediFizzx" wrote in message
> news:658r04F2ev0feU1@mid.individual.net...
>> On Mar 29, 10:32 am, Benj wrote:
>>> On Mar 29, 3:46 am, "FrediFizzx"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Bohr's model of an atom is obsolete.
>>>
>>> What is this? Am I talking into a mirror? I
>>> believe I made that point to YOU not too
>>> many posts ago.
>>
>> I don't recall you ever pointing that out to me.
>> Got the link? The statement of yours does
>> not make much sense. It is like word salad.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.electromag/msg/95b90bc9c5bf29f3
> ... looks like it.

That seems to express some confusion over the term "orbital". In no way
does the word imply a simple circular/elliptical path. I don't believe
the modern concept of an orbital could be fairly described as a simple
path of any shape; the idea is a lot less linear. Maybe it's terminology
that is causing an apparent communication problem.