|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
5th ed. book, Chapt.1 What is this Theory? ; #6; ATOM TOTALITY (AtomUniverse) replaces Big Bang 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. The Big Bang theory places all of its information into an "explosion", and the Universe is not an entity, a "whole thing" in the Big Bang but some amorphous nonentity. The Big Bang is structureless. Whereas the Atom Totality has all the richness of atomic physics to lean on. We can talk about size, about shape, about structures such as a nucleus, and Cosmic protons and cosmic electrons. We can talk about a evolution or transformation of atoms. With the Big Bang we are left speechless and questionless, because there is nothing to talk about other than some explosion allegedly happened. 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 : (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 this hinders the theory. They mistakenly think the Plutonium Atom Totality will decay away and -out-goes-the-Universe. Here one minute and gone the next, type of mistake. So how do I answer those two most recurring 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 relative to all the other atoms, 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. 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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
5th ed. book, Chapt.1 What is this Theory? ; #6; ATOM TOTALITY(Atom Universe) replaces Big Bang theory
On Sep 26, 6:14*am, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote: *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. The Big Bang theory places all of its information into an "explosion", *and *the Universe is not an entity, a "whole thing" in the Big Bang but *some *amorphous nonentity. The Big Bang is structureless. Whereas the Atom *Totality *has all the richness of atomic physics to lean on. We can talk about *size, about *shape, about structures such as a nucleus, and Cosmic protons and *cosmic *electrons. We can talk about a evolution or transformation of atoms. *With the *Big Bang we are left speechless and questionless, because there is *nothing *to talk about other than some explosion allegedly happened. 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 : (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 *this *hinders the theory. They mistakenly think the Plutonium *Atom Totality will decay away and -out-goes-the-Universe. Here *one minute and gone the next, type of mistake. So how do I answer those two most recurring 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 relative to all the other atoms, *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. Archimedes Plutoniumhttp://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/ whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies Have you ever seen a movie where you turn on the TV half way through and catch a scene where there's bits of a building flying all over the place, people are ducking in ditches and flying through the air taking a dive, 50 foot flames are everywhere, there's a big dark mushroom cloud over the scene of debris, ... the firetruck comes racing... If you get the chance, watch the movie in full next time to see what happened to cause all that! Herc |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
5th ed. book, Chapt.1 What is this Theory? ; #6; ATOM TOTALITY(Atom Universe) replaces Big Bang theory
On Sep 25, 4:24*pm, Graham Cooper wrote:
On Sep 26, 6:14*am, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: *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. The Big Bang theory places all of its information into an "explosion", *and *the Universe is not an entity, a "whole thing" in the Big Bang but *some *amorphous nonentity. The Big Bang is structureless. Whereas the Atom *Totality *has all the richness of atomic physics to lean on. We can talk about *size, about *shape, about structures such as a nucleus, and Cosmic protons and *cosmic *electrons. We can talk about a evolution or transformation of atoms. *With the *Big Bang we are left speechless and questionless, because there is *nothing *to talk about other than some explosion allegedly happened. 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 : (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 *this *hinders the theory. They mistakenly think the Plutonium *Atom Totality will decay away and -out-goes-the-Universe. Here *one minute and gone the next, type of mistake. So how do I answer those two most recurring 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 relative to all the other atoms, *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. Archimedes Plutoniumhttp://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/ whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies Have you ever seen a movie where you turn on the TV half way through and catch a scene where there's bits of a building flying all over the place, people are ducking in ditches and flying through the air taking a dive, 50 foot flames are everywhere, there's a big dark mushroom cloud over the scene of debris, ... the firetruck comes racing... *If you get the chance, watch the movie in full next time to see what happened to cause all that! Herc Watch the historical event: Herc meets Archie Poo. (A sequel to Godzilla meets Frankenstein.) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
5th ed. book, Chapt.1 What is this Theory? ; #8; ATOM TOTALITY(Atom Universe) replaces Big Bang theory
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: Chapter 1: What Is This Theory 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 : (1) They cannot envision how the universe we see is the inside of one big atom They never saw a chemistry or physics book showing a electron-dot- cloud. Or, they never understood that all those dots is one electron, those 10^60 dots is equal to one electron. They do not understand that those 10^60 dots for an electron is the actual single one electron itself. And so they come into the Atom Totality theory with the false notion that the hydrogen atom electron is one tiny ball or 1 dot and that the uranium atom has 92 tiny balls revolving around it or 92 dots, or that the plutonium atom has 94 tiny balls or 94 dots composing its electron dot cloud. When in fact, each electron of a hydrogen atom or a uranium atom or a Plutonium Atom has 10^60 dots that make-up or compose that specific individual electron. When teaching the electron-dot-cloud in High School or in College, it is perhaps not taught strong enough that all those dots, 10^60 dots are one single distinct electron. Now the night sky of stars and galaxies, it is estimated that there are only 10^11 galaxies and there are only 10^11 stars on average in each galaxy. So that would mean the Cosmos has 10^11 x 10^11, or 10^22 stars, and if we represent each of those stars as a dot we would thence have 10^22 dots. But each star is composed of atoms and a star is typically about 10^30 atoms so that would mean a night sky represented by dots for atoms would have 10^22 x 10^30 = 10^52 dots which is a huge number but a tiny number compared to 10^60 dots. If we included all the other matter in planets and in energy particles we come close to 10^60. 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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
5th ed. book, Chapt.1 What is this Theory? ; #9; ATOM TOTALITY(Atom Universe) replaces Big Bang theory
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: (most snipped away) The Big Bang theory places all of its information into an "explosion", and the Universe is not an entity, a "whole thing" in the Big Bang but some amorphous nonentity. The Big Bang is structureless. Whereas the Atom Totality has all the richness of atomic physics to lean on. We can talk about size, about shape, about structures such as a nucleus, and Cosmic protons and cosmic electrons. We can talk about a evolution or transformation of atoms. With the Big Bang we are left speechless and questionless, because there is nothing to talk about other than some explosion allegedly happened. I need to talk more about the fact that the Big Bang is so vague about anything. I need to spend alot more time talking about the overall features of the Big Bang versus the Atom Totality. And I am having trouble in finding the appropriate words to describe this inability of the Big Bang. This topic alone, should persuade anyone, whether a trained scientist or a layperson that the Big Bang is a fake theory. The best words to describe the situation so far are these: (1) entity versus nonentity (2) structures versus having no structure (3) patterned versus amorphous or no patterns The Atom Totality is a theory in which the Universe is a single entity, a structured single entity and a patterned single entity. The Big Bang is only one thing -- an explosion. The Big Bang is not an entity, and not a structure, and cannot have a internal pattern. So that when Johns Hopkins in early 2000s reports a color for the Universe, it could not be for a Big Bang since it is not a single entity structure. Or when Luminet team of researchers reported in the early 2000s that the Cosmos fits a Poincare Dodecahedral Space geometry, they could not be referring to the Big Bang because it is not a single entity with structure. What I am looking for are more words and terminology to add to this list. Because the difference between a Big Bang theory and a Atom Totality theory is that the Atom Totality theory insists that the Universe has always and forever will be a structured patterned entity. It is not a huge onion or as the ancient philosophers once thought of a terra firma resting on the back of a elephant. There is only one material object in the Cosmos that can be the Cosmos itself. It is not a piece of cheese for the Moon is not cheese. It is not the onion nor the terra firma elephant. But it is the atom. In all of the Cosmos, only the atom itself can be the entire Cosmos. So the Big Bang never is able, nor is it possible to conceive of the Big Bang as a entity. And that should have eliminated the Big Bang theory as a viable theory of science. For it will always stay submerged in its obfuscation of some "explosion". There is only one term that describes the Big Bang-- "explosion". And that is vagueness, and in the veils of imagination and daydreaming or nightdreaming. So without doing any further work. Without doing any evidence searth or computations or experiments. The Big Bang should be dismissed as a fake theory from the start, because it lacks clarity. It lacks details. Big Bang is anti-science. The Big Bang goes so far as to even imply that the laws of physics were broken at the explosion or during the explosion and that some time after the explosion, when things settled down, do we even have Physics arising. The Atom Totality theory says that the Universe has always been Quantum Mechanics, and always will be Quantum Mechanics. So any commonsense person, even those that hate doing science, can see the deficiencies and faults of a Big Bang. That it is deceptive and imaginary and vague. It is everything that science should not be-- obfuse and imaginary. I am not happy with the few words and concepts of Entity, Structure, Pattern that distinguishes the Atom Totality from the Big Bang, and am looking for more such words of description. And this is important since the Big Bang is defeated as a fake before the starting block. 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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
5th ed. book, Chapt.1 What is this Theory? ; #6; ATOM TOTALITY(Atom Universe) replaces Big Bang theory
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
4th ed. book, preface #1; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) theory;replaces Big Bang theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 176 | June 9th 10 05:43 AM |
Redshift and Microwave radiation favor Atom Totality and disfavorBig Bang #9; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) theory; replaces Big Bang theory | Net-Teams, | Astronomy Misc | 1 | May 31st 10 05:19 PM |
chapt 1; table of comparison Big Bang with Atom Totality #222 AtomTotality theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | December 28th 09 03:12 AM |
MECO and layered ages #66 ;3rd edition book: ATOM TOTALITY (AtomUniverse) THEORY | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 2 | July 11th 09 08:24 AM |
#1 new book; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANGTHEORY IN PHYSICS | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 13 | May 1st 09 06:25 AM |