|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
#32 Luminet team made an error just as Johns Hopkins made an error on
I was looking for the matter distribution of the Observable Cosmos as
to how much more dense the galaxies are in the Great Wall Zones compared to our Local Group of galaxies and I happened to stumble on this website. ---quoting http://members.aol.com/newssciencepa..._univshape.htm In the September 2004 issue of the research journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, a group of researchers write that they has found “hints” of the structure Luminet described. If space is structured this way, researchers believe that the cosmic microwave background should exhibit a specific pattern called “matched circles.” This means that as we peer into space, certain areas of the radiation should look the same as other areas. (snipped) One outcome of the hypersphere framework is that objects leaving one face of the dodecahedron come back in the opposite face, but rotated partially. To be exact, the amount of the rotation is 36 degrees, which also happens to be the angle by which your direction would change if you turned a corner while walking along the edge of a pentagon. --- end quoting --- For years now, since Luminet team has reported their dodecahedron result, I have given them the benefit of the doubt that the Cosmos is 12 faced dodecahedron and I have doubled or 2X the 6 lobes of 5f6. So I adjusted the plutonium atom to accomodate the Luminet findings. Six lobes of a 5f6 would give a cube not a dodecahedron, so I altered my theory of 5f6 by saying it is easy to 2X the 6 lobes to get 12 faces. That somehow the lobes of 6 turn into a 12 faced dodecahedron. But, after reading that website and noticing that the Luminet team offers a Experimental Testing as to whether the Observable Cosmos obeys a Dodecahredon or whether it obeys a Cube. And fortunately that website speaks of a experimental test. It talks of the "Matching Circles Test" Now, if Luminet team is correct of a dodecahedron then the angle of 36 degrees should be prominent somewhere of Equality or Duality in physics. I know of not one single case where there is duality of a 36 degree angle. What I do know for sure is that in EM theory that electricity equals magnetism or is the dual of one another. And the angle that separates Electricity from Magnetism such as the transverse light wave or the Oersted Experiment is a 90 degree angle. In other words, Quantum Mechanics duality of Electricity and Magnetism is a "Matching Circle" and that matching circle is not a 36 degree angle expected in a Dodecahredon but rather a 90 degree angle expected of a Universe that is shaped as a Cube. So the Luminet team made a mistake somewhere in their calculations around with the Microwave Background radiation and forgot to apply a 1/2 correction for it is not 12 faces but 6 faces. Similarly in the early 2000s a Johns Hopkins team announced the Observable Cosmos has a pale green color but a Rochester Optics team pointed out they neglected a correction factor and now it is widely known the Cosmos is a silvery white color close to the color of what a sample of the metal plutonium looks like. So, ever since Luminet's team announced Dodecahedron, I have been giving them the benefit of doubt and fixing my Plutonium Atom Totality to accomodate a Dodecahedron, but now that I see there is a Experimental Test to decide on whether Dodecahedron or Cube, I see that the Luminet Team was in error and the Plutonium Atom Totality was correct all along with a 6 faced Cosmos as a 6 lobed figure. 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
|
|||
|
|||
#32 Luminet team made an error just as Johns Hopkins made an
On May 15, 1:06 pm, wrote:I see
that the Luminet Team was in error and the Plutonium Atom Totality was correct all along with a 6 faced Cosmos as a 6 lobed figure. speaking of which, what has happened with your double-slit single nipple model? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
#33 stacking up all the s, p, d, and f orbitals of plutonium; new
someone wrote:
On May 15, 1:06 pm, wrote:I see that the Luminet Team was in error and the Plutonium Atom Totality was correct all along with a 6 faced Cosmos as a 6 lobed figure. speaking of which, what has happened with your double-slit single nipple model? "Matching Circles" would have all 6 lobes the same and allow a focused concentration on the one lobe containing the Milky Way. Each lobe is one electron and the 5f6 is the last 6 electrons of 231Pu. Each lobe has a nipple end closest to the nucleus. And each lobe grows its galaxies as a double-slit Dirac Radioactivity. But one has to wonder where the other Electrons of a Plutonium Atom Totality stack up. What about the s and p and d and f orbitals. Are they hidden in nodes which we are forbidden to see? Is the Observable Universe just the last electron of 5f6 or is it the last 6 electrons? A hint of that answer was in the last decade of the 20th century when Sandage found stars of 20 billion years old and Freedman later found the age of the Cosmos as a mere 7 to 9 billion years old. So there ensued a clash because they undermined the Big Bang, and so Sandage fudged his work to climb down from 20 billion years to that of around 14 and Freedman was coerced to move up from 7 billion to that of 14 so that the Big Bang community could restore its dignity continue with their fake theory. The data cannot be fudged or lied about, in that the Observable Universe has layered ages of stars older than the newest lobe of the Atom Totality. Because we can see 20 billion year old stars in a nearby lobe while the Milky Way lobe is only 7 billion years old means that we can observe at least two different electrons which are in two different lobes of the 5f6 of 231Pu. As the Atom Totality answers many old questions, a flood of new questions come in. Archimedes Plutonium 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 |
John Hopkins-Led Team Present 3rd Hubble Option | Jeff Findley | Policy | 18 | February 8th 05 10:21 PM |
John Hopkins-Led Team Present 3rd Hubble Option | richard schumacher | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | February 4th 05 03:02 PM |
Oberg at Johns Hopkins APL (Wash DC area) on Friday | JimO | Policy | 0 | April 16th 04 11:24 PM |