|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Chapt24 Cosmic abundance and distribution of the chemical elements#411 Atom Totality 4th ed
Chapter 24
Subject: chap 24, cosmic distribution and abundance of chemical elements COSMIC ABUNDANCE OF THE CHEMICAL ELEMENTS * * * * The cosmic abundance of the elements suggested by the Big Bang would predict a lower abundance of hydrogen coupled with the age prediction of the observable universe. In the Big Bang model, all the other elements were derived from hydrogen nucleosynthesis. *Considering the average lifespan of a large star which will terminate in a supernova explosion and the maximum age of the observable universe according to the Big Bang then it is math-wise impossible to have the uniformity and homogeneity spread of the elements throughout the observable universe and still maintain the cosmic abundance of hydrogen. *The three facts of (1) the homogenous dispersal of the elements from carbon on up (2) the prevalent abundance of hydrogen (3) the maximum age of the observable universe as calculated by the Big Bang model of around 14 to 15 billion years age, are mathwise impossible for the chemistry of the Cosmos to be so uniform. * * * * The Big Bang model would predict a gradual decline in abundance of the elements concomitant with increase in atomic number. What needs explanation in the Big Bang model is the fact of increase in atomic number with an increase in abundance but with less stability than its neighboring elements. *The element thorium and uranium are such elements. *A Pu Atom Totality model would require *differential abundances of elements even though these elements have a higher atomic number. The reason-- the differential abundance of the elements are required for stability of successive atom totality and the case for a purposeful-atom- totality going towards a heavier element atom totality. Biological evolution which is nucleosynthesis is a purposeful process. *We would not be here now to discuss a Plutonium Atom Totality if it was not for the prevalence of thorium and uranium inside the Earth heating-up the interior and having caused mutation of genetic material in the past. *The abundance of the radioactive elements is required in the future for us to obtain huge supplies of energy required for heavy element nucleosynthesis. * * * * The Big Bang model of the observable universe predicts that the element technetium with atomic number 43 by laws of math probability must be more abundant in the observable universe than the higher odd numbered atomic elements such as rhenium atomic number 75. * A Big Bang model would show at least one nuclide of each mass number stable to radioactive beta decay modes. Yet technetium and promethium are counterexamples. *An Atom Totality would explain the abundance of thorium 90 and uranium 92 and the depletion of technetium 43 and promethium 61 in the observable universe, because of a purposeful-atom-totality. We have a mystery as to their rarity of the lighter elements in our Solar System. A fact that the Big Bang theory has never been able to wrestle with. The Atom Totality theory has begun to wrestle with why the Comets have twice as much deuterium as does Earth, saying that Earth is twice as old at 10 billion years than the Comets and due to this age that the radioactive elements in 10 billion years of Dirac radioactivities loses about 1/2 of its deuterium density. Earth and the inner planets are soaked full of radioactive elements whereas the outer gas giants and the comets have missed out on 5 billion years of Dirac Radioactivities creating radioactive elements that depletes the deuterium density. Probably the same explanation goes for the lighter elements such as lithium, beryllium, boron et al. One method for proving Earth and Sun and terrestrial planets are twice as old as the gas giant planets is the core data. Cores of planets are somewhat analogous to tree-rings because the older an astro body is, the more it has iron nickel, especially old stars. So a comparison of Solar System cores should indicate dense iron cores for Inner Planets compared to Outer-Planets. But the mathematics of cores would not be a linear relationship but rather a logarithmic relationship tying into the Dirac Radioactivities. For the Solar System was created and grew from particles shot from the nucleus of the Atom Totality which landed and ended up on one of the planets or Sun, such as what is daily seen as gamma ray bursts or cosmic-rays. Why am I so keen about proving Earth is twice as old as Jupiter? Because if this is true, then not only is the Solar System a layered age system but the entire Cosmos is layered in age. A layered age Cosmos and Solar System would destroy both the Big Bang theory and the Nebular Dust Cloud theory. So if I can prove that Earth is twice as old as Jupiter, would lay to rest the contentious debate between Freedman and Sandage of older stars in a younger Cosmos. And the Solar System is a better data collection than stars that are light years away and surrounded by assumptions and presumptions. So I had zircon crystals and cores as methods to prove the claim that Earth is twice as old as Jupiter and I used the cores of the satellites of Jupiter and Saturn to compare which does not accord with the Nebular Dust Cloud theory. So in the core method of proving, I use the cores of the Sun and Inner planets and compare them with the Outer Planets and their satellites. I was able to find a table from this website on the cores of the solar system or inferred cores: --- quoting from *http://www.indiana.edu/~g302/planets.pdf. --- Solar System Composition Metals Oxides Mass Diameter Fe, Ni SiO 2 ,MgO,FeO Name (10 27 g) (10 3 km) % (10 27 g) % (10 27 g) Sun 1,990,000 0.1 0.2 Mercury 0.33 4.88 50 0.16 50 0.17 Venus 4.87 12.11 30 1.46 69 3.36 Earth 5.97 12.76 29 1.73 69 4.12 Mars 0.64 6.79 10 0.06 90 Asteroids 0.0002 15 3x10 -5 85 1.7x10 -4 Jupiter 1900 143.2 4 80 9 170 Saturn 570 120 7 40 14 80 Uranus 88 51.8 8 7 17 15 Neptune 103 49.5 6 6 14 14 --- end quoting from *http://www.indiana.edu/~g302/planets.pdf. --- But let me give a third method of proving Earth is 2X as old as Jupiter. The idea here is that if the Inner Planets and Sun have double the abundance of elements like Rubidium and Strontium and Thorium and Uranium, these radioactive clocks, than the Outer Planets, would imply that Earth is 2X as old as Jupiter. So I was looking for any reports on the relative abundance of the radioactive elements for the Inner Planets compared to the Outer Planets. About the only website I found indicated that the recent robot flyby of Saturn's Titan indicated alot more thorium and uranium in parts per billion than on Saturn. So just as the iron cores of Io, Europa, Titan are incongruent to Jupiter and Saturn, that it appears as though the relative abundance of radioactive elements is also incongruent. So I have these three methods to attempt to prove that Earth is 2X as old as Jupiter: (a) Zircon crystal (b) cores of iron and nickel, relative size and mass (c) relative abundance of radioactive elements such as rubidium, strontium, thorium, uranium If this claim of mine is true that Earth is twice as old as Jupiter, then there will not be much of a contentious debate over such a report because it is relatively easy to follow-up and since it is in our backyard of the Solar System, that skeptical scientists cannot deny such a report whereas they can easily deny the ages of stars light years away. So, if my claim is true and once a report is filed indicating the age of Earth is 2X as old as Jupiter, is a day in which two widely accepted theories are destroyed and thrown into the trashcan-- the Big Bang theory and Nebular Dust Cloud theory. 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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Chapt29 density and distribution of galaxies #385 Atom Totality 4th ed | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | March 29th 11 08:50 PM |
chapt15 the cosmic distribution of chemical elements as a diffractionpattern #218 Atom Totality theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | December 26th 09 06:03 AM |
chap 15, cosmic distribution of chemical elements #207 Atom Totalitytheory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | December 17th 09 08:05 AM |
distribution of galaxies implies a cosmic atom; Chapt.10; #181; 3rded; Atom Totality theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | November 15th 09 05:44 AM |
distribution of galaxies points to Atom Totality not Big Bang #176 ;3rd ed; Atom Totality (Atom Universe) theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | November 6th 09 08:29 AM |