Chapt11 Missing Mass, Dark Matter&Energy; Solid Body Rotation #73Atom Totality theory 5th ed.

Subject: electron-dot-cloud of atom solid body rotation?

Subject: missing mass, solid body rotation inside an atom of
its electrons?


*Now I come to several questions about the Cosmic Missing Mass
*conundrum solved. It is easily solved by
*the nucleus of the Atom Totality since 99.9 percent of
*the mass of a atom is the nucleus of the atom.


Those who study the missing mass problem usually
*place it anywhere from 70% to over 90% of the mass
*of the cosmos is missing and they derive their percentages from the
*solid-body-rotation of globular clusters.


But now I wonder if in an atom in the laboratory, take any atom for
*instance and apply the Schrodinger Wave Equation of its electrons
and
*can someone get a
*solid-body-rotation of the electron dot cloud?


So that the Cosmic solid-body-rotation of galaxies is not due to
*gravity at large but due to Electrodynamics
*of the motion of electrons in any ordinary atom.


Or, is the motion of electrons in atoms such as the plutonium atom of
*5f6, those 6 lobes or those 12 lobes
*all of which revolve around the nucleus is the motion, not of
electrons but of the electron-dot-cloud a solid-body-rotation.

I think it is safe to say that the motion of the electron-dot-cloud
would etch out what a bar magnet held under a sheet of paper with
iron-filings etches out-- that is, solid-body rotation.


Subject: PBS tv NOVA NOW on missing mass

Subject: So, how many times did NOVA NOW vacillate??


I watched a NOVA Science Now tv program discussing this topic.


You know 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
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.


An easy way of proving this is for those observations of "solid body
rotation" of some galaxies. In order to
create that type of rotation requires 99.9% of the mass of the
Universe to be missing. Then the logic is, what physical system has
a
separation of 99.9% of its mass? The answer is an atom. So the
Universe
itself is an atom, and the reason we are surrounded by evidence of
a
99.9% missing mass is because an
atom hides 99.9% of its mass in a nucleus.


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 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.

Now the question is about this TV program NOVA NOW, discussing the
Dark Matter. There is a huge problem with the Big Bang theory and
that
was made clear by this program. But solutions to the problem by
saying
there is a alternative theory which immediately eliminates the Dark
Matter
was never discussed. And that is a problem of scientists, as they
bias
and make prejudice for their pet theory Big Bang yet never mention
other theories that eliminate the Dark Matter problem. So NOVA NOW
is a platform that entrenches false theories of science like the Big
Bang.


And does anyone review NOVA programs before they air on TV? Because
false theories of science is bad enough-- Big Bang, but the waffling
and
vacillating of a fake theory is something that should have been
edited
before it was aired. What I speak of is the vacillation over the
data
of how much Dark Matter?


I believe it was at least three times or it may have been 4 times in
the
program where different numbers were given to how much Dark Matter
is looked for. Sometimes it was said that 5X the amount of matter
was
missing, so that would be 80% Dark Matter to 20% ordinary matter.
At the end of the program it was mentioned that 95% is Dark Matter.
I do not recall anyone saying 99%, but it is bad enough when every
other
person vacillates over a number.


So the science community is playing games. Not only do they realize
there is a huge problem with Dark Matter, but they want to preserve
their
fake theory of Big Bang. So they do not come clean on even the
presentation
and logic of how much Dark Matter. If they came clean on how much
Dark Matter, then they would not be able to ignore an alternative
theory
that easily explains Dark Matter.


There are some galaxies that show solid body rotation. This solid-
body
rotation implies that the Dark Matter must be 99.9% of the Cosmos of
matter. In other words the Dark Matter is the Nucleus of an Atom
Totality.

Subject: consensus on how much Missing Mass, NOVA's tv show

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
no-one has any firm hold of how much missing mass there is?

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 a lot
more
logic than illogic.


So, have a physics, astronomy conference, and let us get this data of
how much Missing Mass to some arrived consensus. If anyone offers
evidence of over 90% missing mass, signifies to me that the missing
mass is 99.99%.


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.

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

I am going to have to pause for a moment here in this chapter for I
dug myself
into a pit hole of confusion and have to lift myself out by my
bootstraps. It is
of my own doing.

The trouble I am in is that solid-body-rotation indicates the spin in
an Atom Totality
like the vinyl record player spun by an electric motor, not spun via
gravity.

So the confusion I am in, is that I am saying the missing mass is the
nucleus, but
that nucleus of gravity is not what causes solid body rotation.

Solid Body Rotation results from spin of electricity and magnetism in
Atom Totality.

So I have two forms of solid body rotation to explain. I have the
stars inside a single
galaxy displaying solid body rotation. Then the other form of several
galaxies together
displaying the motion.

Perhaps a way out of that dilemma is to say that gravity is positron
space so that the Sun has a apple sized ball of positrons in its
center that pulls the planets toward it. The positron attraction
is a form of magnetism much like a magnet under a sheet of paper
carrying iron filings.

Then the group of galaxies displaying the solid body rotation have a
center point out in space between them, of perhaps the size of a
planet which attracts those galaxies into the motion.

I do not know, for I am a bit confused, since I can no longer say that
gravity is the cause of the motion and that electricity is the cause
of the motion. And that solid body motion is not a indication of a
Nucleus of the Atom Totality. Maybe my mind will clear up tomorrow on
this topic.

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

I am coming to a resolution of this problem, a problem that compounded
itself in front of my eyes.

In prior editions of this book, I understood the problem to be that
solid-body-rotation means
missing mass and like a one dimensional answer gave the answer that
the Atom Totality nucleus
was the seat of the missing mass. But the problem is that the missing
mass and gravity does
not cause solid body rotation. What causes solid body rotation is
electricity and magnetism.
The vinyl phonograph record that spins round and round in solid body
rotation does not care about the mass of the electric motor that makes
the spinning. Likewise the globular clusters within galaxies
and the group of galaxies that display solid body rotation are forced
into that motion by electricity
and magnetism, not be a nearby mass.

So can Dirac's Positron Space be the electricity and magnetism that
causes the solid body rotation?

I think it can, only that we have a duality situation of mass and
electricity.

Mass bends Positron Space and places those positrons closer together.
For example the space within the Sun is bent of its Positrons into a
dense configuration of what can be called the size of a cherry or
orange or grapefruit and the magnetism of that positron-object is
equal to the gravitational pull of the Sun for it is the force of
gravity.

That would explain why all globular clusters near the centers of
galaxies have solid body rotation for the centers of those galaxies
have bent space that a positron-object the size of a planet is formed,
perhaps even the size of a large star is formed which then pulls in
the nearby globular clusters into a solid body rotation motion.

And the same can be said for groups of galaxies in solid body rotation
that space around them is so bent that a positron-object the size of a
star is formed for that group of galaxies and they thence
have solid body rotation motion.

These positron-objects would be somewhat similar to the idea of a
black-hole since they are only black
and composed of positrons. They attract galaxies and stars because the
galaxies and stars are the bits and pieces of the last six electrons
of the 231Pu Atom Totality. So that gravity in an Atom Totality is
Dirac's positron space.


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