consensus on how much Missing Mass, NOVA's tv show Chapter 4, MissingMass #226 Atom Totality

Here is a paragraph I wrote in the 2nd edition of this
book:

Cosmic Missing Mass Conundrum starts with astronomers
of the 20th century observing and recording the motion of
globular clusters and other astronomical objects in that they
possessed Solid Body Rotation. But this Solid Body Rotation
can have a Missing Mass Problem of anywhere from 70%
missing mass to that of 99% missing mass.

--- end quoting a 2nd edition discussion of solid body rotation ---

Sometime ago I watched NOVA Science Now on TV on
dark-matter with their vacillating data as to how much
missing mass is in the Cosmos. Sometimes the
commentators spoke of 80% missing, and maybe
someone said 70%, but I distinctly remember the host saying that it
could be 95%.

So why has the physics and astronomy community
not come together and used logic to weed out these
opinionated numbers and used logic to make a firm
case that the solid-body-rotation as seen in
globular clusters definitively sets the missing mass
percentage at 99.9% missing.

For one of the most pressing issues of science, the
missing mass and the dark matter, should have gathered a conference
where someone of enough
logical abilities can definitively say, 99.9% of the
mass of the Cosmos is missing. That definitive
claim based on globular cluster solid-body-rotation.

So does it make any sort of sense, to have scientists
put together a NOVA program on TV and shout out that
missing mass is a high priority physics issue, and yet
have the entire program waffling and vacillating back and forth where
noone has any firm hold of how much missing mass there is? So how can
physicists and astronomers run around expecting everyone to think
Missing Mass is a huge item of importance and spend an entire program
not knowing any specific amount of missing matter? It would be like
having a science program about a murder trial, and that a murder had
been committed and that 70% of "everyone" was on
trial. Would it not make more sense to have a trial only after 1
single person is charged, rather than 70% here
80% there, 90% over there?

Now I do not want to discourage NOVA from having TV shows on science
because, well, without NOVA, TV would approach that of an intellectual
desert, but still, we expect NOVA to present a program with alot more
logic than illogic.

So, have a physics, astronomy conference, and let us get this data of
how much Missing Mass to some arrived concensus. If anyone offers
evidence of over 90% missing mass, signifies to me that the missing
mass is 99.99%, because if it gets as high as 90% in any data of
evidence, is like leaky water evidence, that
if you have a leak of water means the container leaks out 99.9% of the
water.

Analogy:

I said and made the prediction that when Cangaroo
gets up and running to be the counterpart experiment
in the southern hemisphere to the Fly's Eye of Utah
for cosmic gamma ray bursts that since their observatories are in
opposite directions of the Cosmic skies, I predict that a cosmic gamma
ray burst event that occurs at Cangaroo, say on August
8, 2010 at 10pm would occur simultaneously in Utah
at the same time. That is a prediction based on the idea that Cosmic
gamma ray bursts come mostly from the Nucleus of the Atom Totality.
And is a
implication of Dirac's new-radioactivities.

But let me apply that prediction to that of Solid-Body-Rotation. In an
Atom Totality, the solid body rotation is a sign that the galaxies and
stars are rotating around a Nucleus of the Atom Totality. So that we
should have a southern hemisphere telescope pick out a globular
cluster in the southern hemisphere which is also in solid body
rotation and is eerily similar to a northern hemisphere globular
cluster
in solid body rotation. But here is the thing. The direction of
rotation of these opposite hemisphere
globular clusters, in an Atom Totality would be the
same direction. They should be all one direction.
But in a Big Bang theory, some globular clusters
would be clockwise whereas an equal probability
would be counterclockwise. In an atom totality, the
direction would be uniform.

And there is a chapter in this book that talks about
where the location of the Nucleus of the Atom Totality resides. It is
further on in the direction of the
Great Wall and Sloan Great Wall. So if it is spotted that these
globular clusters of solid body rotation
seem to pinpoint the Sloan Great Wall as the center of that rotation,
then we have proof of the Atom
Totality theory with its 99.9% missing mass and
the Nucleas near the Sloan Great Wall.


You know when your theory is correct, when you watch
a TV program that asks where is the Dark Matter?
And you have a simple elegant answer. An answer
that dismisses the Wisconsin mine and dismisses
the computer modeling of dark-matter.

NOVA Science Now discussed this issue on TV
showing a underground iron mine in Wisconsin
where they have a laboratory and a vault where they
keep some instruments near absolute-zero temperature. Hoping to detect
Dark Matter.

One of the troubles of this program and of this
science issue is that there is no logical consensus
as to how much is missing? The host and some
commentators spoke of 5 times the amount missing
indicating 80% of the mass of the Universe is missing, yet at the end
of the program it was mentioned that 95% was missing. This is a
problem
I have run into ever since I discovered the Atom
Totality theory. Of course, the nucleus of an atom
has 99.9% of the mass.

So if I can get the present day science community
to be honest with themselves, to admit that 99.9%
of the mass of the Universe is missing, well, I would
have made progress towards, people then taking the
logical next step-- what if the Universe is an Atom.

That Wisconsin underground mine lab is never going to witness any
dark-
matter, since the dark-matter is the Nucleus of an Atom Totality.

So, one sitting and relaxing and watching a TV show
asking where is the missing mass, and with an elegant and simple
answer -- look for a nucleus.

But one tie-in with the program is that they had to go
underground to get away from Cosmic Rays and I have been discussing
the building of Cangaroo observatory in Australia to monitor Gamma Ray
Bursts. So Wisconsin wants to get away from cosmic rays, and
ironically I want to get more of them. So if we had both Utah and
Australia monitoring Cosmic Gamma
Ray Bursts, and found out that they are linked in events of arriving
on Earth,
would mean that there is a Nucleus of an Atom Totality that was
sending those gamma ray bursts.


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

"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message
...



Here is a paragraph I wrote in the 2nd edition of this
book: NO ONE NOSE WHY

So does it make any sort of sense, to have scientists
put together a NOVA program on TV and shout out that
missing mass is a high priority physics issue, and yet
have the entire program waffling and vacillating back and forth where
noone has any firm hold of how much missing mass there is? So how can

'noone' is not a real word, you ****ing imbecile.