A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Physics does not explain why astro bodies spin or rotate which points out the fakeness of Big Bang and General Relativity; the Atom Totality theory however does explain the origins of rotation



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 28th 06, 06:16 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
a_plutonium[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default Physics does not explain why astro bodies spin or rotate which points out the fakeness of Big Bang and General Relativity; the Atom Totality theory however does explain the origins of rotation

I posted to several newsgroups a few minutes ago, especially
sci.geo.geology since this topic started from a discussion over plate
tectonics in geology. So let me repost the gist of this issue as to the
*origin* of spin or rotation in astro bodies:

--- quoting from a different thread ---
I am going to have to start a new thread as to the question of the
origins of rotation or spin in astro bodies. This is a topic which is
critical and crucial to whether the Big Bang theory is true or false,
as to whether General Relativity is true or false, and as to whether
the Atom Totality theory replaces those two false theories. Both the
Big Bang and General Relativity are deaf dumb and silent as to the
origins of intrinsic spin or rotation. Linear Momentum of astro bodies
are commonsense explained. But Angular Momentum and why astro bodies
have spin and rotation is very much a profound question. General
Relativity would lay the blame on gravity as the cause of Angular
Momentum.

The Atom Totality theory would lay the blame on the fact that every
proton, every electron and every neutron has intrinsic spin and when
mass is conglomerated into a astro body, the spin or rotation that
results is a result of the total vector of every one of the elementary
particles within that astro body, yielding a rotation or spin.

In other words, the fact that Earth rotates or Mars or Asteroids or
Comets or Stars rotate is fundamentally a result of the fact that
electrons and protons and neutrons that compose those astro bodies have
spin angular momentum.

--- end quoting ---

The main point I am addressing above is that we all can conceive and
see in our minds eye how Linear Momentum can originate in physics and
how Big Bang and General Relativity are okay with Linear Momentum.
However, on the subject of Angular Momentum and the rotation and spin
of all Astro Bodies in the Universe, that both Big Bang and General
Relativity collapse into fakery.

The Atom Totality theory however is comfortable with Angular Momentum,
spin or rotation of astro bodies. Comfortable because in the Atom
Totality theory, it is electricity and magnetism, not gravity that
dictates what mass exists and how that mass moves in the universe. It
is electricity and magnetism that creates all the mass we see and tells
how that mass moves.

So why does every astro body have a rotation spin? The answer is that
every elementary particle such as electrons, protons, neutrons have
*spin*. And when you conglomerate these elementary particles into a
astro-body such as the planet Earth or a comet or asteroid or our Sun,
then the vector sum of all those elementary particles confers a
intrinsic Spin or Rotation or Angular Momentum over the entire astro
body.

P.S. Personal Note: for 13 years now of my Internet posts on science,
it is a post such as this one that has scared me the most. The reason I
say scared is that of all the science I have worked on and have
accomplished, it is the simple and easiest and plain and simple in
front of my eyes that I was scared have overlooking. Example:
Archimedes of Ancient Greeks accomplished so much, but he failed to see
a simple thing as the decimal system. How much greater would Archimedes
accomplishments have been if he had not overlooked a way of writing
numbers as decimal representation. Another Example: How much more
simple would it have been for Darwin with his theory of Evolution to
have incorporated genetics of Mendel. Instead, Darwin overlooked
genetics. What I am saying is that the discovery of a new and true
theory of science is often the case where the most obvious and plain
facts are overlooked. Another Example is Special Relativity which was
discovered by many people such as Poincare, Lorentz, Einstein. But the
simple fact that a magnet through a wire yields current and a current
through wire yields magnetism is the end result. So what scares me is
to discover the Atom Totality theory and then overlook some of the most
simple and obvious facts. And one such fact is that in the Atom
Totality theory we explain Angular Momentum, but the Big Bang and
General Relativity are deaf dumb and silent.

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  
Old October 28th 06, 06:59 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
George[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 884
Default Who is Archimeded Plutonium?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes_Plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium (born July 5, 1950) is primarily noted for his varied
and eccentric contributions to Usenet. Plutonium repeatedly claimed to be
the greatest living scientist, and referred to himself at least once as
"The King of Science" [1], although he is almost universally regarded as a
crank. One of Plutonium's earliest and most memorable posts in December,
1993 [2] replies to Andrew Wiles' report on the status of his proof of
Fermat's last theorem.


Background
Since strong user authentication is rarely used on Usenet, some Usenet
posters had suggested that Plutonium might have been a hoax or a practical
joke. However, the claim that Plutonium is a real person is corroborated by
a photograph and article about him in the Dartmouth College campus
newspaper on November 11, 1991 [1]. Nevertheless, there is no assurance
that all posts attributed to Plutonium on Usenet were by him.

According to an autobiography he posted to Usenet in the 1990s, Plutonium
was born with the name Ludwig Poehlmann in Arzberg, Germany. His family
came to the United States in his youth, settling near Cincinnati, Ohio.
Ludwig was adopted in his teens by a local real-estate investor named
Willis Hansen, and his name was changed to Ludwig Hansen. His autobiography
says that he received an undergraduate degree in mathematics from the
University of Cincinnati and did some graduate work at a university in
Utah, but headed off to Melbourne, Australia, to serve as a mathematics
tutor in the early 1970s. He returned to the USA later in the 1970s, and,
according to his autobiography, inherited his adoptive father's real-estate
holdings, which he claimed to have parlayed into a large fortune through
stock market investments in the 1980s. His autobiography also stated that
he spent some time in the United States Navy during the 1980s. At some
point after his adoptive father's death, he changed his name to Ludwig van
Ludvig, under which he may have first posted to Usenet at the start of the
1990s.

Plutonium was long observed on the campus of Dartmouth College, where he
rode around on a bicycle and wore an orange hunting hat and a homemade cape
decorated with atomic symbols in magic marker. Students frequently saw him
using the computer cluster in the basement of the Kiewit Computation
Center, and he regularly published full-page advertisements of his claims
in the student newspaper, The Dartmouth [3]. Plutonium worked as a
"potwasher" (he preferred this term over "dishwasher" because it had the
same starting letter and number of letters as plutonium) at the Hanover
Inn, which the college owns. When asked on Usenet how this observed job
jibed with his claims of wealth, Plutonium explained that he only took the
job to get Internet access. In 1999 Plutonium posted various complaints
about the management of Dartmouth, calling for a strike by workers there
and suggesting various conspiracy theories concerning college
administrators [4]. Plutonium lost his job at Dartmouth about August 1999.
After making what he termed "science odyssey tours" of the United States
and Europe, Plutonium then moved to rural Meckling, South Dakota, where he
resumed his Usenet posting, saying he now lives on a "homestead" apparently
consisting of a house, two Airstream trailers, and a grove of various sorts
of trees.


Plutonium's claims
In late 1990, Plutonium claimed to have had the realization of his
Plutonium Atom Totality Theory, which he claimed to be one of the most
important breakthroughs in scientific history. According to this theory,
the Universe is a giant plutonium atom, and the part of the Universe we are
able to observe from Earth, including Earth itself, is somewhere in its
outer electron shells. He then changed his name to Ludwig Plutonium. In
autumn 1994 he claimed to have realized that he was the reincarnation of
the great early Greek scientist Archimedes, and so once again changed his
name to Archimedes Plutonium.


Biographical notes
In his autobiography (entitled at one point Ludwig Plutonium: the Chosen
One, and claimed to be 2200 pages), Plutonium claims he started posting to
Usenet on August 12 of 1993 under the name of Ludwig Plutonium. He posts
and cross-posts to a wide variety of groups on Usenet, especially in the
sci. (science) hierarchy.

He is also known for posting about his favorite types of fruit and candy to
unrelated science newsgroups [5]. On other occasions he is believed to have
rather ineptly attempted to forge posts under the names of those who
contradicted his claims.

Plutonium sometimes claimed on Usenet to be independently wealthy from his
investments, and on occasion he would post about his stock investment
strategies.

Archimedes Plutonium is often nicknamed "Arky", "Archy", "Archie", "Archy
Pu", or "Archie-Poo" by others on the internet. His exploits are followed
religiously and commented on with a mixture of mockery and amazement on the
newsgroup alt.religion.kibology.


Quotes
a.. "Calm down, man, this is only the Internet, this isn't Vietnam, go
play some par golf or tennis set" [6]
b.. "When an electron is collapsed, i.e., under observation then the
electron transforms into a ball, a particle, and not the dots which go to
making-up of the particle." Quote explaining collapse of the wavefunction
from Plutonium's treatise [7


  #3  
Old October 28th 06, 07:17 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
xray4abc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default Physics does not explain why astro bodies spin or rotate which points out the fakeness of Big Bang and General Relativity; the Atom Totality theory however does explain the origins of rotation


a_plutonium wrote:
I posted to several newsgroups a few minutes ago, especially
sci.geo.geology since this topic started from a discussion over plate
tectonics in geology. So let me repost the gist of this issue as to the
*origin* of spin or rotation in astro bodies:

--- quoting from a different thread ---
I am going to have to start a new thread as to the question of the
origins of rotation or spin in astro bodies. This is a topic which is
critical and crucial to whether the Big Bang theory is true or false,
as to whether General Relativity is true or false, and as to whether
the Atom Totality theory replaces those two false theories. Both the
Big Bang and General Relativity are deaf dumb and silent as to the
origins of intrinsic spin or rotation. Linear Momentum of astro bodies
are commonsense explained. But Angular Momentum and why astro bodies
have spin and rotation is very much a profound question. General
Relativity would lay the blame on gravity as the cause of Angular
Momentum.

The Atom Totality theory would lay the blame on the fact that every
proton, every electron and every neutron has intrinsic spin and when
mass is conglomerated into a astro body, the spin or rotation that
results is a result of the total vector of every one of the elementary
particles within that astro body, yielding a rotation or spin.

In other words, the fact that Earth rotates or Mars or Asteroids or
Comets or Stars rotate is fundamentally a result of the fact that
electrons and protons and neutrons that compose those astro bodies have
spin angular momentum.

--- end quoting ---

The main point I am addressing above is that we all can conceive and
see in our minds eye how Linear Momentum can originate in physics and
how Big Bang and General Relativity are okay with Linear Momentum.
However, on the subject of Angular Momentum and the rotation and spin
of all Astro Bodies in the Universe, that both Big Bang and General
Relativity collapse into fakery.

The Atom Totality theory however is comfortable with Angular Momentum,
spin or rotation of astro bodies. Comfortable because in the Atom
Totality theory, it is electricity and magnetism, not gravity that
dictates what mass exists and how that mass moves in the universe. It
is electricity and magnetism that creates all the mass we see and tells
how that mass moves.

So why does every astro body have a rotation spin? The answer is that
every elementary particle such as electrons, protons, neutrons have
*spin*. And when you conglomerate these elementary particles into a
astro-body such as the planet Earth or a comet or asteroid or our Sun,
then the vector sum of all those elementary particles confers a
intrinsic Spin or Rotation or Angular Momentum over the entire astro
body.

P.S. Personal Note: for 13 years now of my Internet posts on science,
it is a post such as this one that has scared me the most. The reason I
say scared is that of all the science I have worked on and have
accomplished, it is the simple and easiest and plain and simple in
front of my eyes that I was scared have overlooking. Example:
Archimedes of Ancient Greeks accomplished so much, but he failed to see
a simple thing as the decimal system. How much greater would Archimedes
accomplishments have been if he had not overlooked a way of writing
numbers as decimal representation. Another Example: How much more
simple would it have been for Darwin with his theory of Evolution to
have incorporated genetics of Mendel. Instead, Darwin overlooked
genetics. What I am saying is that the discovery of a new and true
theory of science is often the case where the most obvious and plain
facts are overlooked. Another Example is Special Relativity which was
discovered by many people such as Poincare, Lorentz, Einstein. But the
simple fact that a magnet through a wire yields current and a current
through wire yields magnetism is the end result. So what scares me is
to discover the Atom Totality theory and then overlook some of the most
simple and obvious facts. And one such fact is that in the Atom
Totality theory we explain Angular Momentum, but the Big Bang and
General Relativity are deaf dumb and silent.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies


"Physics does not explain why astro bodies spin or rotate ".......????
Wrong, it does!
LL

  #4  
Old October 28th 06, 11:25 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default Who is Archimeded Plutonium?


My theory of Plutonium:

He's a troll.
Nobody that tech. literate could possibly be that wrong.

MadDogs Principle: "The volume of troll **** produced
is directly proportional to the volume of response offered
to the troll."

So why am I posting this???????,
Because he is kinda funny.

MadDog

  #5  
Old October 29th 06, 07:50 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
a_plutonium[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default neutrinos may hold the mechanism Physics does not explain why astro bodies spin or rotate which points out the fakeness of Big Bang and General Relativity; the Atom Totality theory however does explain the origins of rotation

So let us have some plain talk about Big Bang, General Relativity and
Atom Totality theories as it relates to one of the basic motions of the
Cosmos-- that of spin, rotation and angular momentum.

Both the Big Bang and General Relativity are fine and dandy and okay
when it comes to Linear Momentum because both of those theories are
grounded and grown from Linear Momentum. The Big Bang is a linear
momentum cannon so to speak, unless you want to rifle the barrel of the
cannon in order to lend some spin to the projectile. An explosion is a
linear momentum event. Explosions do not involve Angular Momentum. So
the Big Bang is deaf, dumb and silent as to how Angular Momentum
becomes established. And why every astro body from that of a galaxy on
down to a comet has Angular Momentum.

General Relativity would say this widespread Angular Momentum occurs
due to gravity that as a planet grows from the Nebular Dust Cloud
theory or as a star grows from a Galactic Dust Cloud that the accretion
process of growth begins the spinning or rotation of the growing of the
new planet or new star. The accretion in towards the center of the
planet or star or galaxy stars a rotation motion. Trouble with this is,
is that Angular Momentum is more widespread than that of Dust Cloud
Coalescence. And that the spin of planets from dust cloud coalescence
would be strictly a math relationship of size of astro body with
rotation and that is not what is observed in our own solar system.

General Relativity is a theory based on Linear Momentum in the first
place and is very much lost and out of place with Angular Momentum.
Mass bends space and follows the curvature of that bent space is very
much solely confined to Linear Momentum and out of place with Angular
Momentum.

The Atom Totality theory begins the discussion of Angular Momentum by
noting that every proton, electron, neutron has an intrinsic spin and
so every astro body is a vector sum of its elementary particles Angular
Momentum. So it is not a question of where does Angular Momentum arise
in an astro body, but a question of the vector sum of the elementary
particles spin translates into the spin rotation of the astro body. But
I am not trouble free in explaining why two almost identical stars or
two almost identical planets would have vastly different rotations or
spin angular momentum. There are some stars formed after a supernova
which ended up with vastly different spin rotations. Somehow, there is
a mechanism for which I am not privy to at this moment in time. Some
mechanism for which the distance of a planet to its star system that
gives rise to its actual spin or rotation. Something about electricity
and magnetism that determines angular momentum.

Something like the Titius Bode spacings of planets that determines
revolution distance but also characterizes spin angular momentum.

Because, as I have characterized the above, planet Earth could be
spinning so wildly that it would not hold together. For there is a
range of possible rotation speeds. That if every elementary particle of
Earth of electrons protons and neutrons were so aligned in their spin
that the vector sum of those spins would be a Angular Momentum that the
gravity of Earth could not hold together this planet and it would fly
apart. This is the mechanism I am unclear about.

And we have signs of this mechanism on a cosmic scale for we notice
many old remnant stars of supernova explosions that have enormous spin
angular momentum. Some astronomers have even called for microsecond
spins but I doubt the veracity of such reports. Those stars did not get
that spin from the supernova explosion because that event is a Linear
Momentum event. So how did they thence acquire the huge Angular
Momentum.

I maybe very much premature with a guess as to the mechanism. But guess
I will. And I sense a mechanism with that of neutrinos. Neutrinos in
the Universe are so abundant that we could call them in physics as the
"fabric of space itself, or table on which the rest of physics is
worked out". Give me a new planet or star and place them on the "table
of physics" of this constant bath of neutrinos that coarses through
every mass and those neutrinos would somehow determine the vector sum
for the spin angular momentum.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

  #6  
Old October 29th 06, 08:10 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
Volker Hetzer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 88
Default neutrinos may hold the mechanism Physics does not explainwhy astro bodies spin or rotate which points out the fakeness of Big Bangand General Relativity; the Atom Totality theory however does explain theorigins of rotation

a_plutonium wrote:
I still remember you from when I was a student.
Surely this was before dejanews?
Why don't you get on with your life too?

Lots of Greetings!
Volker
  #7  
Old October 30th 06, 06:53 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
a_plutonium[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default a little known fact that was never appreciated in Physics until now neutrinos may hold the mechanism Physics does not explain why astro bodies spin or rotate which points out the fakeness of Big Bang and General Relativity; the Atom Totality

Now let me talk for just a moment about the overall big picture of
physics today as it relates to that of Linear Momentum and Angular
Momentum. Momentum, we can all agree are two main pillars of all of
physics. Removing momentum, either linear or angular is like removing
the foundation of a building without disturbing the building.

The trouble though, with modern day physics and astronomy is that it
almost totally ignores Angular Momentum on the large scale. On the
microscopic scale, the angular momentum is very much important and
accounted for. On the large scale, we see astro bodies rotate and spin
on axis but we have never payed attention to what causes this spin. We
have never really asked why does the planets and comets and asteroids
all have different spins and stars vary drastically?

Modern day physics is really in a mess when it concerns momentum.

For the theory of the Big Bang with its ally of General Relativity
never really focuses on why such a varied Angular Momentum of astro
bodies. It is as if to these two theories, that only Linear Momentum
has any value and that Angular Momentum is of little to no importance.

But the Atom Totality theory is very much more different for it places
greatest emphasis on Angular Momentum. Think about it for a second. If
the galaxies and stars are all pieces of the last 6 electrons of 231Pu,
then all momentum is angular momentum. And whenever we think we see
linear-momentum, we simply have not streched the path of motion to a
large enough distance. Inside an atom, every motion, is arguably
angular momentum. Perhaps the only linear momentum motion inside an
atom is that of radioactivity emission.

On the other hand, comparing the Big Bang allied with General
Relativity, every motion arguably in these theories is Linear Momentum
with few if any Angular Momentum to account for.

Now, here again enters another great clue from Experimental Physics of
the 20th century. The John Bell with Alain Aspect Experiment that
decides whether Quantum Mechanics is on the large scale as well as the
small scale. And we all know the result. And John Bell went to its
final logical conclusion of that of SUPERDETERMINISM.

So if we add Superdeterminism to this discussion, then we are led to a
very remarkable end point. Can you have Superdeterminism in our Cosmos,
our Universe, and yet allow for every electron, every proton and every
neutron to align itself inside of astro bodies-- randomly?

If you accept Superdeterminism, then the alignment and vector sum of
every elementary particle of its spin angular momentum must be so
aligned as to give the rotation spin of that astro body that we
currently observe.

Amazing Coincidence:

To most people reading this post would find it merely a amazing
coincidence that Electromagnetic spectrum if we include Neutrinos can
penetrate every elementary particle in the Cosmos. Most people find
that fact as merely a coincidence. But to those that believe and
understand Superdeterminism do not find it a coincidence but a
necessity to have Superdeterminism. That the Cosmos is so built, so
rigged that every particle has easy access via EM radiation plus
Neutrinos. So that every Elementary Particle in this Universe of ours
is being "ordered" to align its spin in a very special and specific
direction. Every electron, proton, neutron that makes up planet Earth
is being "ordered" and demanded by the Nucleus of the Atom Totality to
have a vector sum spin of 24 hours (or thereabouts) spin angular
momentum.

The Big Bang with its ally of General Relativity, find this fact that
the universe has radiation that is in constant steady communication
with every Elementary Particle as merely just a "amazing fact". But
neither of these two theories ever attempted to explain why the planets
and stars and galaxies spin in the manner they spin. Never explained
how Angular Momentum originates in astro bodies. And the reason is well
understood because both of these theories are based on Linear Momentum.
And deaf, dumb and silent when it comes to Angular Momentum.

So the little known fact in the title of this post is worthy of
repeating. Why is it that in physics, we have the EM spectrum of
radiation that is able to instantly communicate with most Elementary
Particles that make up astro bodies, but when we include Neutrinos into
the "spectrum of communication in order to execute Superdeterminism"
that we include every Elementary Particle in the Cosmos. If
Superdeterminism is true, then we have to have a full spectrum of
communication. If Superdeterminism was false, then we do not need EM +
Neutrinos. Because this spectrum is full is not a proof that
Superdeterminism true, but it is evidence that Big Bang and General
Relativity are false theories.


Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

  #8  
Old October 30th 06, 07:30 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
a_plutonium[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default how and why each astro body has the spin rotation that it has


a_plutonium wrote:
(everything else snipped except this paragraph)

Amazing Coincidence:

To most people reading this post would find it merely a amazing
coincidence that Electromagnetic spectrum if we include Neutrinos can
penetrate every elementary particle in the Cosmos. Most people find
that fact as merely a coincidence. But to those that believe and
understand Superdeterminism do not find it a coincidence but a
necessity to have Superdeterminism. That the Cosmos is so built, so
rigged that every particle has easy access via EM radiation plus
Neutrinos. So that every Elementary Particle in this Universe of ours
is being "ordered" to align its spin in a very special and specific
direction. Every electron, proton, neutron that makes up planet Earth
is being "ordered" and demanded by the Nucleus of the Atom Totality to
have a vector sum spin of 24 hours (or thereabouts) spin angular
momentum.


I feel I should make it directly clear as to how and why the galaxies,
stars, Sun, Jupiter, Earth, comets, asteroids, etc etc have the spin
angular momentum that they have.

I should make it clear and state it directly how spin angular momentum
such as the Earth rotating in 24 hours on its axis, how that came
about.

All astro bodies are composed of Elementary Particles of electrons and
protons and neutrons. Elementary Particles all have a *spin*. This spin
is angular-momentum. All astro bodies are a vector sum of the spin of
every one of its elementary particles that forms the rotation of that
astro body.

Important Fact never before spoken of in physics: The important fact is
that the rotation of an astro body such as Earth rotating 24 hours on
its axis is due to the fact of the alignment of all the elementary
particles within Earth that yields that specific spin rotation. So here
we have the idea that the spin inside the particles that compose the
larger body causes the spin of the larger body. This is like the mantra
of the Atom Totality itself. That the Universe is one big atom for
which it is composed totally of nothing but smaller atoms. So the
mantra transfers over to momentum. That the momentum of a bigger body
is caused by the vector sum of the elementary particles composing it.

So the only other thing that needs to be worked out is what
communication exists in the Universe that tells, dictates and orders
each elementary particle inside of Earth to line up in such a way as to
yield a 24 hour rotation spin. And the answer is that the EM spectrum
plus Neutrinos are in constant communication with every elementary
particle inside of Earth "ordering them to line up in a specific
manner".

Summary: I needed to directly state the idea or principle that a large
astro body angular momentum is a vector sum of its Elementary Particles
composing it of their spin angular momentum. And that the communication
of the Nucleus of the Atom Totality via EM and Neutrinos tells each
elementary particle how to line up.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

  #9  
Old October 31st 06, 12:02 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
a_plutonium[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default an observation that would be instant proof of the claim that Earth's rotation is due to spin angular momentum of Elementary Particles

An instant proof of the claims of this thread-- that the rotation of
planets, stars and galaxies are mostly due to the spin angular momentum
of the Elementary Particles that compose those astro bodies.

But here is a instant proof. We take a rocket or spacecraft and launch
it. Once the fuel is depleted the spacecraft is left wandering space.
It had no spin angular momentum the moment it was launched to the
moment it used up all of its fuel.

We observe the spacecraft years later and we find it, rather
miraculously with a spin angular momentum. Curiously we ask why and how
did it acquire such?

Well, according to this thread, all mass objects are composed of
Elementary Particles which have intrinsic spin angular momentum and
when in space those particles begin to line up their spin angular
momentum and cause a "rotation" in the object.

So, curiously, has anyone noticed a spin angular momentum from any of
our spacecraft abandoned in space?

Now I did some looking up of rotation periods for the Sun and the
planets and the Sun is approx 25 days. Mercury is 58 days; Venus 224
days reverse; Mars 1.03 days; Jupiter 0.4 days; Saturn 0.4 days; Uranus
0.4 days reverse; Neptune 0.6 days.

Again, I want to emphasize, that if rotation is caused by Nebular Dust
Cloud coalescence of matter and where gravity causes the spin rotation,
then that data statistic should be a linear relationship. But instead
it is too random. Especially the fact that Venus and Uranus are reverse
spins relative to the others. So this tells us that the Nebular Dust
Cloud theory of planet origins is probably another one of those fake
theories.

The highest spin angular momentum in our solar system is Jupiter;
indicating that Jupiter is growing mass via Cosmic rays (Dirac's new
radioactivity accretion)


Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

  #10  
Old October 31st 06, 09:10 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
a_plutonium[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default Moon rotation should be near 0 not 27 days an observation that would be instant proof of the claim that Earth's rotation is due to spin angular momentum of Elementary Particles


a_plutonium wrote:
(snipped)

Now I did some looking up of rotation periods for the Sun and the
planets and the Sun is approx 25 days. Mercury is 58 days; Venus 224
days reverse; Mars 1.03 days; Jupiter 0.4 days; Saturn 0.4 days; Uranus
0.4 days reverse; Neptune 0.6 days.


Now the Moon rotates in approx 27 days and is the slowest rotator
except for the satellite Iapetus of Saturn of 79 days.

What do I make of this? Well, considering that the Moon collided with
Earth some 4 billion years ago, I would think that all of its spin
rotation would have been lost or transferred into linear momentum by
the impact and that the Moon should not have any spin now according to
present day physics and what is taught in present day astronomy.
So the Moon according to present day physics and astronomy attitudes
would be a nonrotating entity, having lost its ability to spin rotate
because of the collision. Now why does Iapetus have such a slower
rotation? Was it also a collision casualty of long ago?

But why the Moon even has a 27 day rotation would be explained by me as
a result of the total mass of the Moon in communication with the
Nucleus of the Atom Totality that the streams of neutrinos that course
through the Moon each and every second, and ordering or
superdetermining the alignment of each and every Elementary Particle
within the Moon (its protons, electrons and neutrons) to orient each
such particle so the end result is that the spin rotation of the Moon
is 27 days and likewise for Earth that it ends up as 1 day (or 24
hours). In this viewpoint, Angular Momentum is the bulk Momentum of the
Universe and where Linear Momentum is rare. Linear Momentum occurs
where radioactivity takes place for the particle that emanated due to
radioactive decay is emitted with Linear Momentum.

In physics and astronomy before the Atom Totality theory, was based on
Linear Momentum for the Big Bang and General Relativity is all based on
Linear Momentum. But the Universe is all about rotation-- rotation of
planets and stars and galaxies. And revolution is merely another form
of rotation.

So, has anyone observed any one of our abandoned spacecrafts that we
sent on some long ago mission which had only Linear Momentum during its
useful-life and which surprizingly is now rotate-spinning? You see, the
explanation for why this old lost spacecraft is now rotating-spinning
on some axis is because the Nucleus of the Atom Totality is sending
neutrinos through this old antique (can I call it an antique
spacecraft) and those neutrinos are telling each elementary particle of
the spacecraft how to align its spin angular momentum and thus
producing a rotating antique spacecraft. So, has anyone observed such a
case?

For the Moon should have next to 0 rotation but it has a huge 27 day
rotation.

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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Gravitational Instability Theory on the Formation of the Universe Br Dan Izzo Policy 6 September 7th 04 09:29 PM
The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory Br Dan Izzo Astronomy Misc 0 August 31st 04 02:35 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.