|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
#1 new book; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANGTHEORY IN PHYSICS
#1 new book; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANG THEORY IN PHYSICS The last time I wrote on this book was the 2nd edition starting in August of 2007. This is April of 2009 and the start of the 3rd edition. One of the things I want to get rid of, from the 2nd edition was the poor numbering schemata. Where I found out that numbering each post is the most efficient means. This book is probably the most important single book to ever be written and stands alongside the Ancient Greek theory of the Atomic theory. This book is the completion of the Ancient Greek theory that the matter of the Universe is composed of atoms, and the completion of that idea is the Universe itself is one big atom. When I departed the 2nd edition I vowed to myself to return to this book and make the next edition whenever a major new discovery that supports the Atom Totality theory. The 2nd edition was spurred by the Sloan Great Wall. There has been no great new evidence supporting the Atom Totality since the 2nd edition, that I am aware of, but I need to do this 3rd edition to organize better and to make that numbering. I find writing these books not a tedium but rather comforting and relaxing. I believe happiness in life is that of "order" and so to instill order into this Atom Totality book gives me great pleasure and happiness. Order is synonymous with happiness. The Chapters of this book, I want to list the chapters as to the most convincing evidence that proves the Atom Totality theory starting with chapter 3, and saving chapters 1 & 2 to explain the theory and provide ascii art pictures of the Plutonium Atom Totality. Chapters of this book: (1) what is this theory? (2) pictures of the Atom Totality theory and history of the theory and precursor hints Observational and experimental support (3) density and distribution of galaxies (4) Tifft quantized galaxy speeds (5) layered age of Cosmos with 6.5 billion years old Cosmos yet old galaxies of the Uranium Atom Totality 20.2 billion years old; the data including discussion over the layered ages of the Solar System where Earth and Sun are likely to be twice as old as Jupiter. (6) Cores of the Solar System destroys both the Big Bang theory and Nebular Dust Cloud theory and what replaces them is the Atom Totality theory and Growing Solar System via Dirac Radioactivities. (7) uniform blackbody 2.71 K cosmic microwave background radiation and the Dark Night sky: Olber's Paradox (8) missing mass conundrum and the cosmic distribution of chemical elements (9) shape of the Cosmos as 6 lobes of 5f6 as nonrelativistic as Cubic or as relativistic Dodecahedron (10) color of the cosmos as plutonium off-white Mathematical and logic beauty support (11) inverse fine structure constant and proton to electron mass ratio explained (12) "pi" and "e" explained (13) Atomic Theory as the foundation of science universal laws and the Atomic theory Syllogism (14) Future News and Research Reports supporting the Atom Totality Theory and future news and research reports commentary Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
#2 the 3rd edition; new book; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORYREPLACES BIG BANG THEORY IN PHYSICS
wrote: #1 new book; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANG THEORY IN PHYSICS The last time I wrote on this book was the 2nd edition starting in August of 2007. This is April of 2009 and the start of the 3rd edition. One of the things I want to get rid of, from the 2nd edition was the poor numbering schemata. Where I found out that numbering each post is the most efficient means. This book is probably the most important single book to ever be written and stands alongside the Ancient Greek theory of the Atomic theory. This book is the completion of the Ancient Greek theory that the matter of the Universe is composed of atoms, and the completion of that idea is the Universe itself is one big atom. When I departed the 2nd edition I vowed to myself to return to this book and make the next edition whenever a major new discovery that supports the Atom Totality theory. The 2nd edition was spurred by the Sloan Great Wall. There has been no great new evidence supporting the Atom Totality since the 2nd edition, that I am aware of, but I need to do this 3rd edition to organize better and to make that numbering. I find writing these books not a tedium but rather comforting and relaxing. I believe happiness in life is that of "order" and so to instill order into this Atom Totality book gives me great pleasure and happiness. Order is synonymous with happiness. The Chapters of this book, I want to list the chapters as to the most convincing evidence that proves the Atom Totality theory starting with chapter 3, and saving chapters 1 & 2 to explain the theory and provide ascii art pictures of the Plutonium Atom Totality. Chapters of this book: (1) what is this theory? (2) pictures of the Atom Totality theory and history of the theory and precursor hints Observational and experimental support (3) density and distribution of galaxies (4) Tifft quantized galaxy speeds (5) layered age of Cosmos with 6.5 billion years old Cosmos yet old galaxies of the Uranium Atom Totality 20.2 billion years old; the data including discussion over the layered ages of the Solar System where Earth and Sun are likely to be twice as old as Jupiter. (6) Cores of the Solar System destroys both the Big Bang theory and Nebular Dust Cloud theory and what replaces them is the Atom Totality theory and Growing Solar System via Dirac Radioactivities. (7) uniform blackbody 2.71 K cosmic microwave background radiation and the Dark Night sky: Olber's Paradox (8) missing mass conundrum and the cosmic distribution of chemical elements (9) shape of the Cosmos as 6 lobes of 5f6 as nonrelativistic as Cubic or as relativistic Dodecahedron (10) color of the cosmos as plutonium off-white Mathematical and logic beauty support (11) inverse fine structure constant and proton to electron mass ratio explained (12) Bell Inequality with Superdeterminism fits only in an Atom Totality theory (13) "pi" and "e" explained (14) Unification of Forces of Physics to that of one force-- Coulomb force makes sense only in an Atom Totality (15) Gravity becomes the Dirac Ocean of positron-space in a Coulomb Unification (16) Atomic Theory as the foundation of science universal laws such as the Maxwell Equations (17) Physics due to Atom Totality makes all the other sciences, especially mathematics as tiny subsets inside of physics (18) Atomic theory Syllogism (19) Future News and Research Reports supporting the Atom Totality Theory and future news and research reports commentary Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
#3 the best evidence will come from our Solar System ;3rd edition
From here on out I shorten the title;
#1 new book; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANG THEORY IN PHYSICS And I do not need a preface or introduction for the chapter 1 : What is this Theory? dispenses the need for a preface and introduction. A serious and important book does not need blabbering blubber but can dive right into the action. And should dive into the action. Chapters of this book: (1) what is this theory? (2) pictures of the Atom Totality theory and history of the theory and precursor hints Observational and experimental support (3) density and distribution of galaxies (4) Tifft quantized galaxy speeds (5) layered age of Cosmos with 6.5 billion years old Cosmos yet old galaxies of the Uranium Atom Totality 20.2 billion years old; the data including discussion over the layered ages of the Solar System where Earth and Sun are likely to be twice as old as Jupiter. (6) Cores of the Solar System destroys both the Big Bang theory and Nebular Dust Cloud theory and what replaces them is the Atom Totality theory and Growing Solar System via Dirac Radioactivities. (7) uniform blackbody 2.71 K cosmic microwave background radiation and the Dark Night sky: Olber's Paradox (8) missing mass conundrum and the cosmic distribution of chemical elements (9) shape of the Cosmos as 6 lobes of 5f6 as nonrelativistic as Cubic or as relativistic Dodecahedron (10) color of the cosmos as plutonium off-white Mathematical and logic beauty support (11) inverse fine structure constant and proton to electron mass ratio explained (12) Bell Inequality with Superdeterminism fits only in an Atom Totality theory (13) "pi" and "e" explained (14) Unification of Forces of Physics to that of one force-- Coulomb force makes sense only in an Atom Totality (15) Gravity becomes the Dirac Ocean of positron-space in a Coulomb Unification (16) Atomic Theory as the foundation of science universal laws such as the Maxwell Equations (17) Physics due to Atom Totality makes all the other sciences, especially mathematics as tiny subsets inside of physics (18) Atomic theory Syllogism (19) Future News and Research Reports supporting the Atom Totality Theory and future news and research reports commentary Now probably that chapter list will change frequently but it gives me a order guidance. What I want to do is talk about the most immediate and highly supportive evidence that the Atom Totality theory is the true theory and that the Big Bang is a fake theory. I believe what will happen is that the astronomy and cosmology physics will highly support and indicate the truth of the Atom Totality theory but since the distances are so far away, that the pattern and distribution of galaxies that is equal to the distribution of the electron-dots of the electron- dot-cloud of a Plutonium Atom is not enough evidence for the weak minded physicist. And that the overwhelming evidence that even the weak minded physicist cannot dismiss will be evidence in our own backyard-- our Solar System. So the day in which it is announced that say the Earth and Sun are twice as old as Jupiter and Saturn, is the day in which the Atom Totality theory will remove the Big Bang theory. Or the day in which it is found a chemical substance that dates the Solar System at 10 billion years of age. That the acceptance of one theory over an old theory takes place if the evidence is nearby. It is sad that science and physics rely on closeness or nearby evidence even though faraway evidence becomes overwhelming. As for my own journey with the Atom Totality theory, it was never that of supporting data or supporting evidence. It was from the start in November of 1990, that the beauty of symmetry or harmony that the Universe had to be an atom just as all matter is of atoms, that the Atom Totality theory was borne. The logical symmetry and beauty allowed me to discover it, much like the discoveries by Dirac in the early 1900s with quantum mechanics, that the logical symmetry demands it to be true. And then afterwards mount the supporting data. So the above listed chapters are what I consider the best available evidence that the Atom Totality theory is the true theory and that the Big Bang is a fake theory. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
#4 chapter 1; What is this theory? ;3rd edition book: ATOM TOTALITY(Atom Universe) THEORY
Chapter 1: What Is This Theory
In as few of words as possible to describe this theory is my signature block for my posts to the Internet: The whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies. If you look in a chemistry textbook of what an electron looks like, it is not a ball shaped object but a whole lot of little dots that form a cloud. So the Atom Totality theory is basically the idea that the dots of the electron-cloud are galaxies in the night sky. So as you look up in the night sky and see shiny white dots as galaxies and as stars, those white dots are mass-pieces of the last six electrons of 231Plutonium. To describe the rival theory of the Big Bang theory would go like this: The universe arose from a big explosion. That is the sum total to the Big Bang theory. It is simplistic and does not have much information. It does not tell us why it exploded and the Big Bang theory is not Quantum Mechanics. The Atom Totality theory is all Quantum Mechanics for it posits that only atoms, including the Universe itself, exist. And the Atom Totality theory is a consistent theory since it posits that only atoms exist. All matter is composed of atoms but science neglected to complete the picture of logic by realizing that the whole entire universe must also be an atom. Laypersons and nonscientists and even a large proportion of alleged scientists have two major problems and errors with the Atom Totality theory and these two errors are this: (1) They cannot envision how the universe we see is the inside of one big atom (2) They mistakenly think that since plutonium is radioactive that the Atom Totality will decay away and poof!!-out-goes-the-Universe. Here one minute and gone the next type of mistake. So how do I answer those two most often errors that both laypersons and even most trained scientists make as listed in (1) and (2) above? I answer them by saying look at a chemistry textbook of the electron- dot-cloud of atoms. Their mistake is that they think the electron is a single ball that goes moving around the nucleus of an atom. It maybe a ball when the atom is collapsed wavefunction such as the moving of electricity in a wire. But an atom that is Uncollapsed wavefunction has its electrons as dot-clouds. The electron is a large cloud around the nucleus of the atom and is a huge number of dots. Each one of those dots is a tiny hunk or piece of the electron. So that if all the dots were put together then the electron would be a ball. So now we begin to understand how a plutonium atom of its electrons is the galaxies of the night sky. That each galaxy we see in the night sky is a tiny piece of an electron of the Atom Totality. If you examine a chemistry textbook of the 5f6 or the s, or the p or the d or the f orbital of a electron you will see a electron-dot-cloud. That the electron is not a ball but those huge number of dots. So now we can easily envision the Atom Totality theory. We look at the night sky of all those dots of light. Some of those dots of light are stars and some are galaxies. And now we look at the chemistry textbook of what an electron looks like and it is a bunch of dots around a nucleus. So that is the crux of the Atom Totality theory, that galaxies and stars (galaxies are just a concentration of stars) are dots of the electron dot cloud and so we are living inside one big atom. And the chemical element that fits the numbers of physics and mathematics the very best is the chemical element plutonium. Now to answer the other most often mistake by laypersons and even those who call themselves scientists is the notion that if the Atom Totality was plutonium that it would decay and be gone. The answer I give is that radioactivity is time itself. That our universe, our cosmos would not have time if the Atom Totality were not radioactive, or, at least, it would not have sufficient and ample enough time to run the universe, like a machine that does not run well, or like an animal or plant that does not grow fast enough. Time is merely change of matter in position. If every atom stood still and in place and never changed position, then there would be no time. Life could not exist if every atom were to stand still and not move relative to other atoms. So, to answer why the Atom Totality is a radioactive element is to say that you want the Universe to be a entity that has alot of change going on and radioactivity provides that change. We see this change every day in Cosmic particles of protons appearing uniformly and of Cosmic gamma ray bursts. Radioactivity of the Atom Totality is what makes stars and planets come into existence in that the daily accretion of particles of radioactivity from the Nucleus of the Plutonium Atom Totality is what gives us our Sun and Earth and Solar System and Milky Way Galaxy. Summary: The Atom Totality Theory is easy to state for it simply says that the Universe itself is one big atom and the chemical element that fits the special constants and numbers of physics and mathematics the best is plutonium, specifically 231Pu. When one asks for a similar explanation of the Big Bang theory one gets no description whatsoever other than to say "explosion happened". And the two most often made mistakes about the Atom Totality theory is the error that an electron is a single ball and the error that plutonium radioactivity is incompatible or incongruent with an Atom Totality. P.S. Today I spent some considerable time searching my own mind of the past. Searching for when it was in my youth that I realized and understood the Atomic theory of Democritus that all matter is composed of atoms. Now the 5th and 6th grade schools is when I was 11 and 12 years old. And I remember reading comic books titled "Metal Men" and that was the 5th grade and I remember in 5th or 6th grade a fellow student brought a glass tube of mercury and watching him play with it on the desktop. From the comic books, I can thus remember that I knew the Atomic theory was already in my mind and whether I had read about the Atomic theory from another book, I do not recall. I am trying to remember when I saw the chemical periodic table for the first time. I do not remember whether in grade school or later. So if I were to have to put a date time on when I knew and understood the Atomic theory of Ancient Greeks, I would say I was 11 years old. Now is 11 years of age a common time for youngsters to be cognizant of the fact that all matter consists of chemical elements and only those elements on the periodic table? And whether most youngsters, like myself probably realized the Atomic theory without ever having it lectured to them or read about it in some book. That the Atomic theory is easy enough of a idea that our minds can come to its concept by its own effort. And then later, perhaps age 13 or 14 or 15, I was lectured about the Atomic theory or read it in a book. I do recall reading something about how Democritus would explain water as a fluid because the atoms were round and rolling and that "hot or heat" was atoms pointed and sharp, so that characteristics of materials would be due to geometry of the atoms composing the materials. But I just wanted to discuss this history of mine own learning of the Atomic theory in that I seemed to have had it all along and at the age of about 11 years old, I was fully cognizant that all matter was composed of atoms that were listed on a periodic chart. I wanted to talk about this to point out how simple of an idea the Atomic theory is and that people can come to it in their own minds without ever having been lectured or read about it. At least that was my case. But also, how simple it is to go that one step further and to realize that if all matter consists of the atoms listed in a table, that a small step further would complete the logic of how the world works, in that the Universe itself is an atom. But of course, for me that would be when I was 40 years old. So when I was 11 years old, I realized the Atomic theory from my mind's eye and then from 11 to age 40, I would put those two together that if all Matter is made up of atoms, and surely the Universe is matter, that it be an atom. The Atom Totality theory is easy and simple to explain, and I would guess that if other people, like me, can come to know the Atomic Theory independently of books or lectured to at age 11, that they too, can come to the Atom Totality theory easily, independently in a older age. Few theories of science can it be said that you can arrive at the theory by age 11, independent of book learning or lectured to. So a Hallmark of the Atom Totality theory is that it is simplicity itself. For once a person realizes the Atomic theory, then to lecture the person a tiny bit more by saying the Cosmos is itself an atom. Well, that is supreme simplicity. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
#6 chapter 1; What is this theory? ;3rd edition book: ATOM TOTALITY(Atom Universe) THEORY
What is the theory of the Atom Totality? One way to explore the question is to compare the Atom Totality theory to its rival the Big Bang. I should say alot more about the remarkable deficiency of the stating of what the Big Bang theory is. Given the most active advocate of the Big Bang theory and asked to write a chapter about "What is the Big Bang theory" that it would be hard to write beyond one paragraph explaining the Big Bang theory for about all that can be said is "there was an explosion." And I would suppose the advocate would then refer to some book about the Big Bang which talks about what happened after 3 minutes, after 4 minutes, etc etc. When flawed science exists in the world of science, it is hard to explain or detail it and it becomes very vague, like the Big Bang theory. And it leaves more questions than any answers. What caused the Big Bang and what was the material of matter/energy of the Big Bang and what is time in a Big Bang? And why are all the Quantum Mechanics laws and rules violated by the Big Bang and when does the laws or rules of Quantum Mechanics come into existence for the Big Bang. So that if any scientist in the world at present were to write a book on the Big Bang theory with similar chapters as this book on the Atom Totality theory that the book would be horribly short in any detail. In fact I could write a whole book on just this chapter alone for the Atom Totality theory because it can include all that is known about the chemical elements and Atomic theory and Quantum Mechanics. But the Big Bang book writer faced with a chapter on "What is this Big Bang theory" can say only about a sentence or paragraph -- It was a Cosmic Explosion which created the Universe" What made it explode? What was it in the first place? And why does the Big Bang offer no clues as to the future, or the purpose of life? You see, when science has theories that cannot explain things, then you should and must distrust the theory. When the theory does not connect with other science and when the theory violates other physics theories such as Quantum Mechanics, then the sensible person should not buy the theory. In the past history of physics there have been other theories that were false and which followed a similar deficiency of unable to detail what the theory is. The phlogiston theory for heat and the fluidia theory for electricity are examples of old theories in physics which could not detail or explain the basic foundations of the theory. So you say heat is a fluid or you say that electricity is a fluid, but that never gives you any details of either heat or electricity. So I invite the most enamored lover of the Big Bang theory to write a chapter on the Big Bang of "What this Big Bang theory is" since I cannot see how they can say anything more than "there was a big explosion." In fact the name Big Bang theory suggests it is incapable of detailing the theory because if it had been named Big Explosion theory then the explanation may have said "in the beginning was a big-bang." On the other hand, the Atom Totality theory is so immensely rich of a science theory, that I could write a thousand pages alone on this one chapter. And a counterpart who loves the Big Bang theory writing about the supporting evidence for the Big Bang theory would have only one chapter of supporting evidence in the observation of a red shift expansion of the universe. So other than that observation, the Big Bang theory has no other supporting evidence. Not even the Cosmic Microwave Radiation supports the Big Bang because it is a quantized radiation at 2.71 K and utterly uniform with no fluctuations. The alleged fluctuations in recent past years were due to the fact that the precision of the measuring instruments had been surpassed. So for the past decades of the Big Bang theory, they have only one evidence that supports the Big Bang, whereas this book has more than 20 different categories and subcategories of evidence to support the Atom Totality theory. What is the theme or message of this inability or deficiency of explaining in detail what a theory of science is? The theme is that if a theory of science has a difficult time of explaining its foundations, then it is likely to not be a theory of science but a fakery. However, I do want to leave on a good note for the Big Bang theory. The Big Bang can be incorporated inside the Atom Totality theory given some modifications. In that when the Atom Totality went from a Uranium Atom Totality to that of a Plutonium Atom Totality via what I am guessing was a act of Spontaneous Fission that we can consider that act as a Mini Bang. But the reverse is not possible of fitting the Atom Totality theory inside of the Big Bang theory. And when LeMaitre first wrote about the Big Bang theory, 1920s or 1930s he called it the "Primeval Atom". So the explanation was the explosion of a primeval-atom. I should make some comments on the features of true science. That when science gets caught up in a debate between two rival competing theories, is there a logical testing procedure which can indicate, not prove mind you, which of the two theories is more true than the other? I believe the above two paragraphs may have uncovered a test of validity for rival theories. The test is that if one theory can incorporate the other theory given some modifications of the other theory then it is more likely true and the second false. And where the second theory is never able to incorporate the first theory given modifications of the first theory. Now the underlying Logic of that test is the idea that a true theory cannot be modified to accomodate a false theory and thus be incorporated inside the false theory. Whereas a false theory can be modified and then fit inside the true theory. An analogy for the layperson is a crime mystery murder investigation such as the CSI movies. Where two witnesses one telling the full truth and the second telling a story riddled with lies. So the true story cannot be modified to fit into the liar's story, but the liar's story can be modified to fit into the true story. Anyway, you get a flavor of where I am going with this Test of Rival competing theories. Now can we go back in science history and see if such a test would have worked or helped in the unraveling of which of two rival theories was more true than the other? How about Continental Drift and its rival of Convection Currents? How about Darwin Evolution and its rival of Lamarckian traits? Or Darwin Evolution and its rival of Biblical Genesis? Or how about in astronomy the competing theories of geocentric and heliocentric solar system? Or how about the rival theories of light as particle or light as wave? About the best example of rival competing theories where the test works well is the Newtonian Mechanics versus Quantum Mechanics. Best example because we still consider Newtonian Mechanics as a subset of QM for slow moving and massive objects. But is the test useful only for physics? I do not think so, because in biology I have a recent theory of metal causation for five diseases of Alzheimer Autism Parkinson Prion and Schizophrenia. And where the test applies in that a rival Prion theory of rogue proteins is modified to fit inside the metal theory but where the Metal theory cannot be modified to fit inside the rogue protein only theory. So here is a case example of two rival theories being put to this test and where the Metal theory is conferred more truth value than the rival prion theory. I am not going to spend time here on this test but just thought I should comment on it since it stuck out in my above writing. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
#6 chapter 1; little cleanup here ;3rd edition book: ATOMTOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY
wrote: The test is that if one theory can incorporate the other theory given some modifications of the other theory then it is more likely true and the second false. And where the second theory is never able to incorporate the first theory given modifications of the first theory. The above is garbled. I should do better. The test is that if theory A can incorporate theory B, given some modifications of B, but where theory B can never incorporate theory A given some modifications of A. Then theory A is likely to be the true theory. I am taking the liberty of replacing that entire paragraph in the original. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
#4 chapter 1; What is this theory? ;3rd edition book: ATOMTOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY
On Apr 24, 9:43*pm, wrote:
Now is 11 years of age a common time for youngsters to be cognizant of the fact that all matter consists of chemical elements and only those elements on the periodic table? Yes. Here in California, as it is in many states in the U.S, here's something called Content Standards, which determine what the students are expected to learn in each grade. And so we read: "Grade Five: Physical Sciences: 1. Elements and their combinations account for all the varied types of matter in the world. As a basis for understanding this concept: a. Students know that during chemical reactions the atoms in the reactants rearrange to form products with different properties. b. Students know all matter is made of atoms, which may combine to form molecules. c. Students know metals have properties in common, such as high electrical and thermal conductivity. Some metals, such as aluminum (Al), iron (Fe), Nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), silver (Ag), and gold (Au), are pure elements; others, such as steel and brass, are composed of a combination of elemental metals. d. Students know that each element is made of one type of atom and that the elements are organized in the periodic table by their chemical properties. And so on. Indeed, at the following link: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/docum...5scirefcma.pdf there is a periodic table. Notice that right at the top, it reads, "Grade Five Science Reference Sheet." I don't know about other states, but a quick Google search for "periodic table fifth grade" reveals a number of other states, mostly in the South (GA, LA, SD, VA) that also give the periodic table as a fifth grade Content Standard. Therefore, there's nothing extraordinary about AP learning about the periodic table and the atomic theory in the fifth grade, because that's the normal age for students to hear about it for the first time. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
#7 So in 5th grade Atomic theory is taught ;3rd edition book: ATOMTOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY
wrote: On Apr 24, 9:43 pm, wrote: Now is 11 years of age a common time for youngsters to be cognizant of the fact that all matter consists of chemical elements and only those elements on the periodic table? Yes. Here in California, as it is in many states in the U.S, here's something called Content Standards, which determine what the students are expected to learn in each grade. And so we read: "Grade Five: Physical Sciences: 1. Elements and their combinations account for all the varied types of matter in the world. As a basis for understanding this concept: a. Students know that during chemical reactions the atoms in the reactants rearrange to form products with different properties. b. Students know all matter is made of atoms, which may combine to form molecules. c. Students know metals have properties in common, such as high electrical and thermal conductivity. Some metals, such as aluminum (Al), iron (Fe), Nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), silver (Ag), and gold (Au), are pure elements; others, such as steel and brass, are composed of a combination of elemental metals. d. Students know that each element is made of one type of atom and that the elements are organized in the periodic table by their chemical properties. And so on. Indeed, at the following link: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/docum...5scirefcma.pdf there is a periodic table. Notice that right at the top, it reads, "Grade Five Science Reference Sheet." I don't know about other states, but a quick Google search for "periodic table fifth grade" reveals a number of other states, mostly in the South (GA, LA, SD, VA) that also give the periodic table as a fifth grade Content Standard. Therefore, there's nothing extraordinary about AP learning about the periodic table and the atomic theory in the fifth grade, because that's the normal age for students to hear about it for the first time. Alright, thank you very much. If it is taught as standard in 5th grade in California, I would expect that Anderson High School near Cincinnati Ohio would have taught the Atomic Theory in 5th grade also. That would have been 1960 and I was 10 years old. So my memory was not that good. That the classroom books and lecture probably was where I learned the Atomic theory and that I had not independently rediscovered the Atomic theory. Not to say that I had no predilection, no precognition for the theory before I was formally introduced to the theory. I may have had some preformed notions of the theory. And then when lectured or read the theory that I had it fully in tow. I suppose we can easily experiment socially on this. That we can in a pleasant manner sort of question a group of 9 year olds to see if any of them have a pre Atomic Theory already in their minds. They say there are musical savants at age 5. So can we somehow talk about the chemical elements around a group of 5 year olds without ever saying the Atomic theory, and can we expect any of them "knows the Atomic theory?" Trouble here is the lack of vocabulary for these youngsters to communicate. And the Atomic Theory should resemble the learning of "how to tell time" from a clock. That we mature to an age where our mind can read the clock without having any supervision or training on how to read the clock. So I suspect the learning of the Atomic Theory should follow a similar path. That we learn there are chemical elements and then we put together the pieces of the puzzle and realize the Atomic theory. So that would mean that everyone who never went to school would have likely come upon the Atomic theory in their own minds, just as they understood how to read the clock. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
#8 Chapter 2, Pictures of the Pu Atom Totality ;3rd edition book:ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY
Before I start, I like to comment on some very, very interesting research coming out of the "Dust collected of Comets" near Earth. In that a National Geographic report that some of this dust is older than 4.5 billion years. When it is reported of some dust that is 8 billion or 9 or 10 billion years old. Well, there goes the Nebular Dust Cloud theory along with the Big Bang theory and in comes the Dirac Radioactivity theory with the Atom Totality. As I said earlier, science news that is close to home is the most compelling rather than any other news since the faraway distances always conjures up the idea that something was unaccounted for in the observations. The most compelling evidence that the Atom Totality is true and the Big Bang is a fake, is the pattern of the galaxies in the Great Wall and Sloan Great Wall. Such a pattern is what is found for the electron- dot- cloud of plutonium. Such a pattern is not in agreement with a Big Bang. ---------------------- Relativistic Physics has the energy of light at E = mc^2 NonRelativistic Physics has the kinetic energy at E = 1/2mv^2 Notice that one is 1/2 and the other is 1. That is important as to the shape of the Atom Totality whether it is 6 sided or 12 sided. Simple version of what a plutonium atom looks like: . \ . . | . /. . . \. . .|. . /. . ..\....|.../... ::\:::|::/:: _ _ (:Y _ _ ::/:::|::\:: ../....|...\... . . /. . .|. . \. . . / . . | . \ . There are six lobes and those lines represent those 6 lobes and all the dots represent the last 6 electrons as a electron dot cloud. Each dot is a galaxy in the night sky. So when we look up in the nighttime at the Night Sky and see all those stars and galaxies we are looking at pieces of the last six electrons of one gigantic big atom of plutonium. 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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
#8 Chapter 2, Pictures of the Pu Atom Totality ;3rd edition book:ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY
Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Before I start, I like to comment on some very, very interesting research coming out of the "Dust collected of Comets" near Earth. In that a National Geographic report that some of this dust is older than 4.5 billion years. When it is reported of some dust that is 8 billion or 9 or 10 billion years old. Well, there goes the Nebular Dust Cloud theory along with the Big Bang theory and in comes the Dirac Radioactivity theory with the Atom Totality. You're talking about interstellar dust particles that were created from first and second generation supernovae predating, and providing the raw material for, the formation of our solar system. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presolar_grains http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_dust |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
#73 Newton's discovery that white light is composite; new book: "Howthe Universe is organized into Galaxies & Voids by the Atom Totality" | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 3 | June 19th 08 07:06 AM |
#262 new book Continental Drift and Plate Tectonic theory updated andbased on Atom Totality theory | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 8 | April 11th 08 08:24 PM |
Physics does not explain why astro bodies spin or rotate which points out the fakeness of Big Bang and General Relativity; the Atom Totality theory however does explain the origins of rotation | a_plutonium | Astronomy Misc | 158 | December 26th 06 06:53 AM |
In an Atom Totality E = mcc, but in a Big Bang or String theory E = mccc and higher | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 18 | July 30th 06 12:18 PM |
231Pu Atom Totality Universe is a dodecahedron? The 5f6 is adodecahedron?? | Archimedes Plutonium | Astronomy Misc | 5 | April 14th 05 08:48 AM |