|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Chapt16.14 mathematics of the force of gravity to explain galaxydistribution #1444 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
I see sci.astro is up and working again, and since the second text is
more astronomy and less chemistry and electromagnetism, although the Maxwell Equations are the axioms of physics and all the sciences, I will change my send placement. Alright, I am in a bit of a trouble here explaining walls, superclusters and voids when the Maxwell Equations demand uniformity and equidistance, not chaotic random distribution such as Jarrett, Juric, Geller & Huchra. And so I am turning to the force of gravity to rectify the problem. The problem is that in Maxwell Equations, the galaxies should not form walls and superclusters, and the voids should be small. So there is something wrong in our conception of the force of gravity, and I can immediately point to that misconception. Alright, from various sources, mostly Wikipedia, I was able to compile 
this list of speeds: Sun 
____ 
Speed in Space 220 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 7,000 km/hour Mercury 
____ 
Orbital speed Â*47 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 10 km/hour Venus 
____ 
Orbital speed 35 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 6 km/hour Earth 
____ 
Orbital speed Â*29 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 1,674 km/hour Mars 
____ 
Orbital speed Â*24 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 868 km/hour Jupiter 
____ 
Orbital speed Â*13 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 45,300 km/hour Saturn 
____ 
Orbital speed Â*9 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 35,500 km/hour Uranus 
____ 
Orbital speed Â*6 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 9,320 km/hour Neptune 
____ 
Orbital speed Â*5 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 9,660 km/hour The source for the misconception of gravity is that it is impossible for the planets to revolve around the Sun unless the Sun had a relative speed of 0 rather than its speed in space of 220 km/sec. Now General Relativity starts to talk about the misconception when it talks about gravity as being "mass bends space and other matter follows the curvature of that bent space". So GR at least begins to talk about the problem but never executes the solution to the problem. The solution is that Space itself is in motion. So if we imagine the Sun and its 8 planets and the entire Solar System including Kuiper belt and Oort Cloud, picture that entire organization of objects and the Space they occupy and call it the Oort Cell of Gravity. Now it is not going to last long if the Sun is moving in space at 220 km/s yet the planets and other objects are moving at a peddly 13 km/sec for Jupiter or 29 km/s for Earth. Everytime Earth and Jupiter are on the revolution in opposite directions of the Sun's motion in space that the Sun will get ahead of Jupiter or Earth and cause a disintegration of their bonding-in-orbit. So there is something hugely missing in the conception of gravity and how it works based on Newtonian gravity and based on General Relativity. The solution is the Maxwell Equations and what that solution is, according to mathematics of the inverse square law, is that the cell of all the objects in the Oort Cloud are moving as a unit cell. In other words Space as the Oort Cloud composes a unit, an object that is rotating, not moving linearly but angular rotation in space at 220 km/ sec. This Angular Space Rotation nullifies the Sun's 220 km/sec. Picture the Observable Universe as a cylinder, a huge cylinder and picture a galaxy as a small tiny cylinder on the surface of the Cosmic cylinder. Now if we zoom into the Milky Way galaxy for the solar system, it too, is a tinier cylinder rotating on the galaxy cylinder which is rotating on the Observable Universe cylinder. In this fashion, I can finally explain the Jarrett, Juric, Huchra & Geller mappings of the galaxies, where I eliminate walls, eliminate superclusters and end up with a 90 million light year maximum distance of seeing galaxies and where they are uniformly spaced, even though our perception of them is to think they form walls. In mathematics we have the fruit tree analogy where you evenly space them and from a distance, you falsely assume they are forming walls, only because of misconception. Now I used to think that the Big Bang theory would be easily shown false if the Atom Totality theory were the real truth. By easy, I meant that just showing the Microwave Background Radiation was blackbody, meaning the Cosmos was a interior cavity of a object-- a large atom, served as proof that the Big Bang is false. However, now, digging into the force of gravity and realizing that the Solar System would have broken apart before it ever got started if the Sun had 220 km/s whereas Earth has 29km/sec, unless, however the Space around the Oort Cloud forms a "gravity cell that is rotating to nullify the 220 km/sec". The idea of "gravity cells" completely destroys the Big Bang theory. Only the Maxwell Equations allow for Space to be a rotation cell. -- Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author- archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as seen he http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986 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 |
Gravity = mass-gravity + positron-space-gravity; superfluid heliumbehaviour #368 Atom Totality 4th ed | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | March 12th 11 08:08 AM |
how many positrons at center of Sun to imitate gravity; #133; 3rd ed;Atom Totality (Atom Universe) theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 13 | August 13th 09 10:53 PM |
magnetic fields of planets explained by Positron-Space-gravity #140;3rd ed; Atom Totality (Atom Universe) theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | August 12th 09 06:37 AM |
Ida and moon Dactyl tests of gravity; #139; 3rd ed; Atom Totality(Atom Universe) theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | August 10th 09 09:38 PM |
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 | Astronomy Misc | 158 | December 26th 06 06:53 AM |