If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. 


Thread Tools  Display Modes 
#1




Gravity = massgravity + positronspacegravity #370 Atom Totality4th ed
Subject: magnetic fields of planets explained by PositronSpace gravity I was able to cobble together the latest information as to the size of the magnetic field of the following planets and moon: Mercury magnetic field strength 1% of Earth or 300 nT Venus magnetic field strength is 10^5 times Earth Earth magnetic field strength 3x10^4nT to 6x10^4nT Moon magnetic field strength is 1 to 100 nT Mars magnetic field strength is 10^4 times Earth Perhaps the easiest supporting evidence for the PositronSpacegravity versus the massgravity is the magnetic field of planets and astro bodies. In the massgravity theory some objects should have zero magnetic field and not a tiny magnetic field such as the Moon and Venus. And some objects with massive iron cores such as Mercury should not have that huge magnetic field. What can explain this anomaly is the PositronSpacegravity theory since a Coulomb force charge creates a magnetic field. In essence, every round astro body has a magnetic field because it has a pseudosphere of positrons, albeit a tiny amount of positrons but it only takes a tiny amount since EM is 10^39 stronger than gravity. Subject: correlation between magnetic field and spin speed due to PositronSpacegravity I should include the spin of these astro bodies as equatorial rotation velocity: Mercury 11km/h Venus 6km/h Earth 1,674 km/h Moon 18 km/h Mars 868 km/h I am looking for a correlation between spin speed and magnetic field due to PositronSpacegravity. Subject: conservation of angular momentum only in an atom totality structure I should include the spin of these astro bodies as equatorial rotation velocity: Mercury 11km/h Venus 6km/h Earth 1,674 km/h Moon 18 km/h Mars 868 km/h Hope those data numbers are correct. I spent the last two days thinking about those numbers. There is no pattern there between the two other than to say they are close to one another other than Mars's rotation velocity. And why should the huge rotation velocity of Earth match its huge magnetic field? There is not a math pattern such as a geometric progression but the magnetic field and rotation speed are somewhat in agreement. But before I go, a strange thought occurred to me which physics never seemed to ask the question nor bothered to give an answer. And that stands to reason if the question was never asked. So maybe I am the first one to ever raise this question. We have linear momentum in physics and angular momentum and each of them are conserved as far as we know. But the question is why does the world have both? And since you have both, can you really differentiate without a doubt the one from the other, or can the two bleed into one another and become indistinguishable? Part of this question asks why atoms and elementary particles have "spin". So can the spin become linear momentum. So it is not a simpleton question but a profound question. I believe the answer is, as far as I can intuit, is that the world actually has only one type of momentum angular, because the world is a gigantic atom which is spinning and if you go to infinity you come back to the same spot you started. So linear momentum is just a "partial angular momentum." The analogy of walking a straight line on Earth is really a arcline and that arc line is conceived of as linearmomentum. Now I believe the fact that angular momentum or spin for an elementary particle is ample proof enough that the world is a circular or elliptical structure like an atom. So in other words, the fact that all momentum reduces to angular momentum and the prevalence of angular momentum throughout physics should be ample proof that the Universe is a elliptic structure and the only feasible structure would be an atom itself. Now people with a real logical physics mind would be convinced of this argument, but it is rare for any scientist to have a really logical mind. I know of two highly logical and physics oriented minds of the 20th century Dirac and Bell. If Dirac and Bell were alive today, both would carry my arguement much further. That we have this predominance of angular momentum, because the Universe is a overall round structure and the only fitting object that could be the Universe is an atom. Archimedes Plutonium http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electrondotcloud are galaxies 
Ads 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Gravity = massgravity + positronspacegravity #369 Atom Totality4th ed  Archimedes Plutonium[_2_]  Astronomy Misc  0  March 13th 11 07:38 AM 
Gravity = massgravity + positronspacegravity; superfluid heliumbehaviour #368 Atom Totality 4th ed  Archimedes Plutonium[_2_]  Astronomy Misc  0  March 12th 11 08:08 AM 
Gravity = massgravity + positronspacegravity; Ida & Dactyl #367Atom Totality 4th ed  Archimedes Plutonium[_2_]  Astronomy Misc  0  March 11th 11 08:10 PM 
Gravity = massgravity + positronspacegravity; reconciling neutrinowith positron #363 Atom Totality 4th ed  Archimedes Plutonium[_2_]  Astronomy Misc  1  March 10th 11 06:39 AM 
Gravity = massgravity + positronspacegravity #362 Atom Totality4th ed  Archimedes Plutonium[_2_]  Astronomy Misc  0  March 9th 11 06:38 AM 