|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
where is the dark-matter, obviously, the Nucleus of the Atom Totality#127 ; 3rd ed; Atom Totality (Atom Universe) theory
I realize this post is out of sequence in this book in that it should be in the chapter of missing-mass, but I watched a NOVA Science Now discussing this topic tonight on Iowa PBS. You know your theory is correct, when you watch a TV program that asks where is the Dark Matter? And you have a simple elegant answer. An answer that dismisses the Wisconsin mine and dismisses the computer modeling of dark-matter. NOVA Science Now discussed this issue tonight showing a underground iron mine in Wisconsin where they have a laboratory and a vault where they keep some instruments near absolute-zero temperature. Hoping to detect Dark Matter. One of the troubles of this program and of this science issue is that there is no logical consensus as to how much is missing? The host and some commentators spoke of 5 times the amount missing indicating 80% of the mass of the Universe is missing, yet at the end of the program it was mentioned that 95% was missing. This is a problem I have run into ever since I discovered the Atom Totality theory. Of course, the nucleus of an atom has 99.9% of the mass. So if I can get the present day science community to be honest with themselves, to admit that 99.9% of the mass of the Universe is missing, well, I would have made progress towards, people then taking the logical next step-- what if the Universe is an Atom. That Wisconsin underground mine lab is never going to witness any dark- matter, since the dark-matter is the Nucleus of an Atom Totality. An easy way of proving this is for those observations of "solid body rotation" of some galaxies. In order to create that type of rotation requires 99.9% of the mass of the Universe to be missing. Then the logic is, what physical system has a separation of 99.9% of its mass? The answer is an atom. So the Universe itself is an atom, and the reason we are surrounded by evidence of a 99.9% missing mass is because an atom hides 99.9% of its mass in a nucleus. So, one sitting and relaxing and watching a TV show asking where is the missing mass, and with an elegant and simple answer -- look for a nucleus. But one tie-in with the program is that they had to go underground to get away from Cosmic Rays and I have been discussing the building of Cangaroo observatory in Australia to monitor Gamma Ray Bursts. So if we had both Utah and Australia monitoring Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts, and found out that they are linked in events of arriving on Earth, would mean that there is a Nucleus of an Atom Totality that was sending those gamma ray bursts. 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
|
|||
|
|||
So, how many times did NOVA NOW vacillate?? #130 ; 3rd ed; AtomTotality (Atom Universe) theory
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: I realize this post is out of sequence in this book in that it should be in the chapter of missing-mass, but I watched a NOVA Science Now discussing this topic tonight on Iowa PBS. You know your theory is correct, when you watch a TV program that asks where is the Dark Matter? And you have a simple elegant answer. An answer that dismisses the Wisconsin mine and dismisses the computer modeling of dark-matter. NOVA Science Now discussed this issue tonight showing a underground iron mine in Wisconsin where they have a laboratory and a vault where they keep some instruments near absolute-zero temperature. Hoping to detect Dark Matter. One of the troubles of this program and of this science issue is that there is no logical consensus as to how much is missing? The host and some commentators spoke of 5 times the amount missing indicating 80% of the mass of the Universe is missing, yet at the end of the program it was mentioned that 95% was missing. This is a problem I have run into ever since I discovered the Atom Totality theory. Of course, the nucleus of an atom has 99.9% of the mass. So if I can get the present day science community to be honest with themselves, to admit that 99.9% of the mass of the Universe is missing, well, I would have made progress towards, people then taking the logical next step-- what if the Universe is an Atom. That Wisconsin underground mine lab is never going to witness any dark- matter, since the dark-matter is the Nucleus of an Atom Totality. An easy way of proving this is for those observations of "solid body rotation" of some galaxies. In order to create that type of rotation requires 99.9% of the mass of the Universe to be missing. Then the logic is, what physical system has a separation of 99.9% of its mass? The answer is an atom. So the Universe itself is an atom, and the reason we are surrounded by evidence of a 99.9% missing mass is because an atom hides 99.9% of its mass in a nucleus. So, one sitting and relaxing and watching a TV show asking where is the missing mass, and with an elegant and simple answer -- look for a nucleus. But one tie-in with the program is that they had to go underground to get away from Cosmic Rays and I have been discussing the building of Cangaroo observatory in Australia to monitor Gamma Ray Bursts. So if we had both Utah and Australia monitoring Cosmic Gamma Ray Bursts, and found out that they are linked in events of arriving on Earth, would mean that there is a Nucleus of an Atom Totality that was sending those gamma ray bursts. Now the question is about this TV program NOVA NOW, discussing the Dark Matter. There is a huge problem with the Big Bang theory and that was made clear by this program. But solutions to the problem by saying there is a alternative theory which immediately eliminates the Dark Matter was never discussed. And that is a problem of scientists, as they bias and make prejudice for their pet theory Big Bang yet never mention other theories that eliminate the Dark Matter problem. So NOVA NOW is a platform that entrenches false theories of science like the Big Bang. And does anyone review NOVA programs before they air on TV? Because false theories of science is bad enough-- Big Bang, but the waffling and vacillating of a fake theory is something that should have been edited before it was aired. What I speak of is the vacillation over the data of how much Dark Matter? I believe it was at least three times or it may have been 4 times in the program where different numbers were given to how much Dark Matter is looked for. Sometimes it was said that 5X the amount of matter was missing, so that would be 80% Dark Matter to 20% ordinary matter. At the end of the program it was mentioned that 95% is Dark Matter. I do not recall anyone saying 99%, but it is bad enough when every other person vacillates over a number. So the science community is playing games. Not only do they realize there is a huge problem with Dark Matter, but they want to preserve their fake theory of Big Bang. So they do not come clean on even the presentation and logic of how much Dark Matter. If they came clean on how much Dark Matter, then they would not be able to ignore an alternative theory that easily explains Dark Matter. There are some galaxies that show **solid body rotation**. This solid- body rotation implies that the Dark Matter must be 99.9% of the Cosmos of matter. In other words the Dark Matter is the Nucleus of an Atom Totality. Scientists are people tied to the truth above all else. And it is a shame that NOVA glides over and away from the truth by presenting propaganda ads for a fake theory of the Big Bang. 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 |
still on chapter 4: and GR is replaced by ocean-of-positrons #126 :3rd ed; Atom Totality (Atom Universe) theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | August 7th 09 08:53 AM |
thanks Utexas some progress on table of precessions #121 ; 3rd ed;Atom Totality (Atom Universe) theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | August 5th 09 08:22 AM |
what is "time" in an Atom Totality and the Plutonium Atom Totalitylayer as 6.5 billion years old versus the Uranium Atom Totality layer at 20 | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | July 8th 09 05:57 AM |
MECO theory reinforced by Atom Totality theory #48 ;3rd edition book:ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 2 | May 21st 09 07:51 PM |
#1 new book; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANGTHEORY IN PHYSICS | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 13 | May 1st 09 06:25 AM |