Chapt22 Cosmos follows a pattern of the inside of an Atom #446 AtomTotality 4th ed

Now I used to like these two maps of the Cosmos of galaxies by Juric
and Jarrett:

http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~mjur...rse/all100.gif
Here is another good website:
http://www.astro.princeton.edu/universe/
And here is another good website:
http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff...tt/papers/LSS/


However, afraid to say that these two maps are better visuals in 3D of
what the
cosmos of galaxies looks like:

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/nearsc.html


http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/wnearsc.gif

Now I am going to start arguing in this book, that we have enough of a
mapping of the
galaxies of the Cosmos to be able to trashcan the Big Bang theory and
validate the Atom Totality theory.

We should not expect a cosmic pattern to emerge in a Big Bang theory
other than to say
galaxies are spaced from a explosion event. If it emerges that there
are intricate patterns
of galaxy distribution such as alternating dense regions (walls) with
voids in a patterned manner such as a diffraction pattern of double
slit experiment, or if we begin seeing cosmic rings of galaxies, then
the Big Bang is no more.

If you look at that atlas of the universe you see a pattern emerging
immediately of the voids being honeycomb shaped and spaced
geometrically opposite. So if there is three
voids in the northern cosmic hemisphere, there are corresponding three
voids at opposite
in the southern cosmic hemisphere.

I think voids can tell almost as much as what galaxies reveal.

Now I have a book on the physics of the plutonium atom and on pages 72
and 73 shows the general set and the cubic set with drawings. Those
drawings include elliptical shapes
and lobe shapes. So that if the Universe is one big gigantic atom of
plutonium, then we would have to see a Cosmic ring of galaxies because
a lobe geometry would have rings
of galaxies appearing, especially in the Cubic set.

Now I remember either Jarrett or Juric talking about a "ring" of
galaxies in their plates
of pictures, and commenting that they did not know if it is a feature
of astronomy or if
it was due to the photography involved.

But already the Big Bang is in hot water so to speak. It is in
trouble. Sure, we can have
a Wall of galaxies and voids in the Big Bang, but we cannot have a
pattern of walls and voids. We cannot have a diffraction pattern as
seen in double slit experiment of the
distribution of galaxies. We cannot have mirror image voids or walls
in the two hemispheres in a Big Bang. And we cannot have rings in the
Big Bang 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

On May 25, 11:52*pm, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
Now I used to like these two maps of the Cosmos of galaxies by Juric
and Jarrett:

http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~mjur...rse/all100.gif
Here is another good website:http://www.astro.princeton.edu/universe/
And here is another good website:http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff...tt/papers/LSS/

However, afraid to say that these two maps are better visuals in 3D of
what the
cosmos of galaxies looks like:

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/nearsc.html

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/wnearsc.gif


Another reason I am beginning to like these atlases of the Universe
better
than Jarrett's and Juric's layout is because the atlas takes no time
to
download, whereas some of Jarrett's and Juric's files are long time in
waiting.

But the question, the burning question in all future picture atlases
of the Cosmos
of galaxies is the question of whether there is a "pattern" or "not a
pattern."
And if there is a pattern, is it the 5f6 of the last six electrons of
a plutonium atom?

In one of Jarrett's or Juric's pictures, a ring starts to appear. In a
Big Bang theory
no ring should appear. In the atlas pictures, one can draw a line as a
pole about 90degreeplus
45degree or about 135degree to 135+180 = 315 degree and where most
everthing left of that pole line
matches something to the right of that pole line. In other words a
mirror image symmetry. The Big
Bang offers no symmetry. The Atom Totality theory insists and demands
cosmic symmetry.

Now I am going to start arguing in this book, that we have enough of a
mapping of the
galaxies of the Cosmos to be able to trashcan the Big Bang theory and
validate the Atom Totality theory.

We should not expect a cosmic pattern to emerge in a Big Bang theory
other than to say
galaxies are spaced from a explosion event. If it emerges that there
are intricate patterns
of galaxy distribution such as alternating dense regions (walls) with
voids in a patterned manner such as a diffraction pattern of double
slit experiment, or if we begin seeing cosmic rings of galaxies, then
the Big Bang is no more.

If you look at that atlas of the universe you see a pattern emerging
immediately of the voids being honeycomb shaped and spaced
geometrically opposite. So if there is three
voids in the northern cosmic hemisphere, there are corresponding three
voids at opposite
in the southern cosmic hemisphere.

I think voids can tell almost as much as what galaxies reveal.

Now I have a book on the physics of the plutonium atom and on pages 72
and 73 shows the general set and the cubic set with drawings. Those
drawings include elliptical shapes
and lobe shapes. So that if the Universe is one big gigantic atom of
plutonium, then we would have to see a Cosmic ring of galaxies because
a lobe geometry would have rings
of galaxies appearing, especially in the Cubic set.

Now I remember either Jarrett or Juric talking about a "ring" of
galaxies in their plates
of pictures, and commenting that they did not know if it is a feature
of astronomy or if
it was due to the photography involved.

But already the Big Bang is in hot water so to speak. It is in
trouble. Sure, we can have
a Wall of galaxies and voids in the Big Bang, but we cannot have a
pattern of walls and voids. We cannot have a diffraction pattern as
seen in double slit experiment of the
distribution of galaxies. We cannot have mirror image voids or walls
in the two hemispheres in a Big Bang. And we cannot have rings in the
Big Bang 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

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/nearsc.html

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/wnearsc.gif

Alright it was Jarrett that reported a ring structure involving P-P
and P-I superclusters.
And I suspect Juric had no such reports of a ring structure.

--- quoting ---
http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff...tt/papers/LSS/


The third layer (0.01 z 0.02) is dominated by the P-P
supercluster
(left side of image) and the P-I supercluster extending up into the
ZoA terminating as the Great Attractor region (notably Abell 3627)
disappears behind a wall of Milky Way stars. An intriguing "ring" or
chain of galaxies seems to circle/extend from the northern to the
southern Galactic hemisphere (see also Figure 1). It is unknown
whether this ring-like structure is physically associated with the
cosmic web or an artifact of projection.

--- end quoting ---

And if we look at the atlas of the universe website above can we see a
ring
structure?

I would say yes, but not as clear as Jarrett's ring pattern.

Now if we look at what a plutonium atom 5f6 looks like:
I do have a picture in the book
THE ELEMENTS BEYOND URANIUM, Seaborg & Loveland, 1990 and page 73.

Let me call that shape a "long balloon" shape. I chemistry and physics
they are called "lobes".
I hate to say sausage shape or cigar shape, but rather a long balloon
shape. And ask the question
if Earth and astronomers were sitting on the surface of a long balloon
compiling an atlas of galaxies
that also rested on the surface of a long balloon, would they end up
with the mapps shown above?

I think we would with a correction to those mapps. If we corrected the
mapps as a Doppler redshift
that records not the distance away of a galaxy but whether the galaxy
resides in a curved part of space
on this long balloon.

So that we can make a few credible assumptions about residing on a
lobe shape. that when we look
down the spine of the lobe we will see alot of galaxies, whereas if we
looked at the nearby edges of the
lobe we would end up seeing alot of voids.

So with a Doppler redshift as untrustworthy of distance and rather
instead, trustworthy as to curvature
we could say that in the atlas picture there is a "spine of the lobe"
that extends from Shapley and Herculean
supercluster at about 60 degrees down through the P-P supercluster and
extending to the Columba supercluster
in the lower left edge.

In other words, a lobe as the geometry of the cosmos would have a
almost straight line of dense superclusters
along its spine and 90degrees on each side of the spine we could not
see much and that a search in this direction usually leads to voids.
And not that there are really voids there, but just because the
curvature drops off rapidly 90 degrees from the spine of the lobe. So
that the mapps or atlases tells us only the ability to see, and not a
accurate description of all the galaxies per distance.

Consider a long thin sausage that can allow people to stand atop and
walk on its spine and that we have little flashlights on posts shining
at a beginning tour position. And so we have several hundred people
standing at the
beginning position. If they looked down the spine of this long sausage
they would see alot of flashlights pointed and shining at these
people. If they looked in the sides of the sausage where the curvature
drops off soon and sharply, they see only a few flashlights.


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