chapt. 16 shape of the Cosmos as dodecahedron #208 Atom TotalityTheory

(16) shape of the Cosmos as 6 lobes of 5f6 as nonrelativistic as
Cubic or as relativistic Dodecahedron

Chapter: shape of Cosmos

Shape of the Cosmos as 6 lobes of 5f6 or as France's Luminet team has
found a dodecahedron

--- quoting in part http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/7/10/5 ---

Is the universe a dodecahedron?

8 October 2003
They claim that a
universe with the same shape as the twelve-sided polygon can explain
measurements of the cosmic microwave background - the radiation left
over
from the big bang - that spaces with more mundane shapes cannot
(J-P Luminet et al. 2003 Nature 425 593).

--- end quoting http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/7/10/5

Shape of the Cosmos is more important than the color of the Cosmos.
And ever since I published and broadcast the Atom Totality theory
starting in 1991 in newspaper and magazines and on the Internet in
1993, that I have stated many times that the 5f6 Observable Universe
is the shape of 6 lobes. This can be seen quite clearly in the book
"The Elements Beyond Uranium" Seaborg & Loveland 1990, page
73 the General Set of nonrelativistic f orbital shapes. Now that same
page shows the Cubic Set and the reader must realize that although
the lobes look like 8 lobes, that keep in mind that they are the
inside
of a CUBE and a cube is a 6 faced regular-polyhedra.

So I have some questions for the Luminet team of scientists and
some questions for mathematicians. My question is how does
one correctly reconcile the shape of the Cosmos-- the Observable
Universe as the lobes of the 5f6 electron orbital of a 231Pu Atom
Totality? My question is can a 6 lobed Cosmos be intrepreted
by the Luminet team as a dodecahedron since a dodecahedron
has 12 faces? Can 6 lobes be interpreted as 12 faces?

Or has the Luminet team of scientist made a small error just
like the Johns Hopkins team of scientist made a small error on
color of Cosmos with their initial news of a pale-green which later
was corrected to be a silvery-off-white.

I am not disputing how the Luminet team derives a shape from
the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation. I am inspecting
whether 6 lobes is equivalent in geometrical form to a
dodecahedron. So I invite mathematicians into this topic.

And also, I left the discussion of color of the Cosmos by saying
that we should connect color to the Microwave radiation and 2.71
K temperature. And luckily we can connect that
microwave radiation of 2.71 K with the Shape of the Cosmos.

I am beginning to suspect that the reason Luminet team found a
dodecahedron as solution as a 12 lobed object whereas the Schrodinger
Equation gives a cube solution or 6 lobed object is for the idea
that Space itself is Dirac ocean of positrons so the 6 lobes have to
be doubled into 12.

If my suspicion is correct, then a solution of the Dirac Equation,
compared
to the Schrodinger Equation of the 5f6 gives a doubling-up of the
lobes.

So I have to go and check to see if that makes sense. Keep in mind,
the difference between Schrodinger and Dirac Equation is relativistic
motion.

Keep in mind also that relativistic motion difference in terms of
energy
is that of E = m c c whereas nonrelativistic is 1/2 m v v of kinetic
energy.

So we see here that kinetic energy is only 1/2 of relativistic energy.

So that makes a very nice agreement. So Luminet was correct all along
and I had not adapted from the Schrodinger to the Dirac Equation.


Looks like I am going to have to double the number of lobes to be that
of
12 rather than the 6.

Have to check with the Dirac Equation versus the Schrodinger Equation
in that Dirac Eq doubles up the number of lobes.

And looking on page 73 of that book mentioned, the General Set and
the
Cubic Set are all nonrelativistic f orbitals. Most of the orbitals are
6 lobed,
and there does show a octagonal lobes.

Now I am trying to picture a dodecahedron in my mind as to whether
there is
top to bottom symmetry. This is tricky for the mind can seldom picture
it
correctly. If I can picture it correctly in my mind that the
dodecahedron does
have a parallel plane of top to bottom but unlike the cube that is
fully
symmetrical that the dodecahedron has a vertice where the other plane
has
a side.

So does a dodecahedron make physics sense for the cosmos and for the
Dirac Equation? I believe it does, in the idea of what is relativistic
to what?
If the Cosmos is one big atom what is relative to what? And the answer
would be that Space is relative to the matter. So that one side of the
dodecahedron is the Space of an ocean of positrons and the other side
is Matter of atoms.

We see this relativitistic effect by the Energy equation of E = mc^2
but we
see it in its dual of Kinetic Energy is E = 1/2 m v^2.

So why the 1/2 or the doubling of one equation versus the other
equation?

It is because of duality and where the E = mc^2 is of the Dirac
Equation whereas
E = 1/2 mv^2 is of the Schrodinger Equation.



simple version of what a plutonium atom looks like
with its 5f6 as that of 12 lobes or as a dodecahedron:

. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .



Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies