Nebular Dust Cloud theory has contradictions #146; 3rd ed; AtomTotality (Atom Universe) theory

Let me discuss plainly about CellWell theory for a few minutes.
I am not as sure of CellWell theory as I am of Dirac's
new-radioactivities. And being sure of Dirac's new-radioactivities
means that the Nebular Dust Cloud origin of our Solar System
is a fake theory.

And as you can surmise, whether the CellWell theory is true or
false is not directly tied to Dirac new-radioactivities.
It could end up that all the planets and their moons and the Sun are
all the same age and that the Solar System is not compartmentalized
into two cells of different evolving ages.

So it may turn out that Dirac's new-radioactivities is true
with Nebular Dust Cloud theory as false and with CellWell
theory as false.

I proposed the CellWell theory in the mid 1990s because I could
sense a large scale texture difference between the inner planets
and Sun and the outer gas giants. I saw this difference mostly
in the cores, that the Nebular Dust Cloud theory would have a
horrible time of trying to explain why dense cores for the first 3 or
4 planets and lightweight densities thereafter, although
Io, a moon of Jupiter is relatively dense core.

So the Atom Totality theory with its Dirac new-radioactivities is
not dependent on CellWell theory. CellWell theory is an "iffy"
theory which maybe true or false. But if CellWell theory is true
it provides a means of expediting the truth of the Dirac new-
radioactivities along with the Atom Totality theory. The truth
of the CellWell theory, if it turns out to be true would mean that
someone found evidence that the age of the Sun and Earth and
inner planets are twice as old as the outer gas giants and that would
rock the boat on the Nebular Dust Cloud theory as well as the Big Bang
theory and speed up everyone to the conclusion that the Big Bang and
Nebular Dust Cloud are fake
theories.

So do I have any new evidence since the mid 1990s when I first
proposed the CellWell theory? Well, yes I do seem to have new
evidence that bolsters the CellWell theory. I speak of the exoplanets
discovery from about the late 1990s to present time.
The data and information coming in on those exoplanets seems to convey
a picture that the evolution of Solar Systems is one tending towards
twin stars or companion stars where a large gas giant planet orbits in
close to a solo star and turns into a twin star. And all the planets
in between the star and the evolving new companion star are either
swallowed up or pushed
out beyond the two large bodies. So in a brief summary, the
exoplanet data portrays a far different evolution of a solar system
than what we think of as a Nebular Dust Cloud scenario
of a evolution.

And I forgotten the statistics of stars, whether the majority are
twin stars and the minority are solo stars like our Sun. I suspect
the majority of sighted stars are in a combination and not solo.

And one of the data information crucial to this sort of study of
whether our Solar System has two ages involved is the data on
the cores of these bodies and only recently have we been able
to give some reliable data as to the core density and the core
size. It is hard in science to argue a position when the data is
mostly unclear and doubtful. Only recently have we sent up
spacecraft that actually measures these data.

Now I suspect that noone in astronomy or physics has done a
analysis of whether the Nebular Dust Cloud theory can arrive
at a situation that we presently are in, with the data of our Solar
System. I doubt that the Nebular Dust Cloud (NDC) theory can produce
the 4 inner planets with those dense cores. I doubt that a NDC can
produce hydrogen and helium gas giants such as Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus
and in between them and the Sun
produce the dense inner planets. Recently on TV was a report
of plastics floating around in the oceans and drifting to far flung
oceans. That offers a good analogy to the NDC theory that in
the opening scene of such a theory, that why would the lightest
elements of hydrogen and helium stay around where the Sun
is going to form and then stay around where Jupiter, Saturn
and Uranus forms but mostly absent elsewhere?

The trouble with the Nebular Dust Cloud theory of science was
that it never had any rival competition. But with Dirac's new-
radioactivities the NDC is now under close scrutiny and it is
failing many tests.

One of those tests is the concentration of water. Why is Earth
having too much water and yet Jupiter could have a huge supply of
water but it does not? So Dirac's new-radioactivities
can better explain the why and where water is in our solar system.

But the obvious test of the NDC is this iron metal cores of
planets and moons. So the data and facts contradict the
Nebular Dust Cloud theory on this specific issue. The core
of the Sun does not agree with the cores of the first four
planets, if our Solar System were created from a Nebular
Dust Cloud. And to make things worse is that the cores
of the gas giants contradicts the cores of the inner planets.

About the only data agreement is that the cores of the moons of
Jupiter follow a pattern that is very much similar to the pattern
of the first four planets beyond the Sun. In other words, Io is a
miniature Mercury, Europa a miniature Earth, Ganymede a miniature
Venus and Callisto a miniature Mars with respect to
their core density and composition.

So we see in the evolution of our Solar System that the cores
of the first four planets beyond the Sun follows a similar pattern
as the four big moon cores of Jupiter. So whatever the driving
mechanism of Solar System evolution is, that mechanism has to
explain those cores, and the Nebular Dust Cloud theory cannot explain
that situation. Dirac's new radioactivities would explain that similar
pattern in the idea that whereever there is dense matter,
multiplicative creation increases the density. So the
new-radioactivities of Dirac would change a nitrogen atom
into a oxygen atom by the addition of a proton and electron
to a specific nitrogen atom, but in the Sun or Jupiter the new-
radioactivites would simply create a singular hydrogen atom.
This would also explain why so much heavy metals are found
in the inner planets even our Moon and why heavy elements
are much more scarce in the Sun and gas giants.

And also, a note-aside: about water. Dirac's new radioactivities
as a multiplicative creation process and especially where dense
matter already exists would have a greater chance of making
water H2O than in the Sun or a gas giant. Say you had a carbon atom or
a nitrogen atom on Earth and the Dirac new
radioactivities zapped the carbon atom with two protons or the
nitrogen atom with one proton converting each to a oxygen
atom and thence binding with hydrogen to form water. So the
Dirac new-radioactivities would explain why the abundance and
scarcity of elements were patterned on the inner planets versus
the Sun and outer planets, something the Nebular Dust Cloud theory
would be incapable.

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