Chapt15.57 ultimate meaning of the fine-structure constant 1/137, the"pi of physics" #1333 New Physics #1536 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

In the early 1990s, before 1993, I assembled a conjecture that is
perhaps the most important conjecture in all of mathematics, today. It
is the problem that everyone in mathematics should stop their own
projects, just drop them as rather trite and meaningless and pick up
on this conjecture. In simple terms the conjecture is that Euclidean
geometry is the assemblage of Elliptic geometry with Hyperbolic
geometry.

Euclidean geometry = Elliptic unioned with Hyperbolic geometry

Another expression is that the "Whole = plug plus hole in fabric"

In terms of Maxwell Equations, the bar magnet is Elliptic geom and the
closed loop wire is Hyperbolic geometry and the electric current that
flows as the bar magnet is thrust through the closed loop wire is
Euclidean geometry.

Now I reached a point in this textbook where I can make final and
ultimate sense of the fine-structure constant of physics. And let me
blair out here and now what it is-- in mathematics, Euclidean
geometry, it has a fine structure constant called pi and defined as
circumference of circle divided by 2xradius and is equal to about
3.14. Now in physics, it has a fine-structure constant equal to about
1/137.

Now in mathematics, when doing only Euclidean geometry the C =pi*d or
C=pi*2r. But physics is not just Euclidean geometry, although most
physicists in their calculations assumes only Euclidean geometry. That
is why Special Relativity is so difficult to imagine is because it is
not just Euclidean but also includes Elliptic and Hyperbolic and how
they produce Euclidean. So when a physicist is transforming with the
Lorentz transformation, all that is taking place is the moving back
and forth between
Elliptic plus Hyperbolic to Euclidean.

In reality, in both physics and mathematics there is but one and only
one "dimensionless constant". In math we call it pi, in physics we
call it fine-structure constant. Now some may think that proton to
electron mass ratio is another dimensionless constant in physics, but
ask yourself how many times is that number appearing in equations of
physics? Never, unless you focus on M_p/M_e. And if it were, then you
take any physics measure such as the volume of proton versus volume of
electron and divide one into the other and claim you found a new
dimensionless constant. So the fact of the matter is, that mathematics
and physics has but one and only one dimensionless number, and for
math it is pi and for physics it is fine structure constant.


Now let me show you how it works for math and then for physics. In
math, since it is a subset of physics, we have a electron moving in a
straight line in Euclidean geometry and now we want a circle, so we
apply a force to bend the electron path to form the circle. We measure
the diameter of the circle and find out it is 3.14 of the
circumference. So we have our pi, a dimensional constant for the
number fits all circles, but only circles in Euclidean geometry.

So pi of 3.14 is not the dimensional constant of physics, but some
other number because physics is worried not just of Euclidean geometry
but has to include Elliptic alongside Hyperbolic. So the pi of physics
is not 3.14 but rather 1/137 = 0.0072. Now that means if you are
working exclusively and only in Euclidean geometry you have to use
3.14, but if you are working in geometry where you have Euclidean =
Elliptic unioned to Hyperbolic, you have to use 0.0072.

Now let me show you how it works specifically. Instead of a electron
in a straight line bent to form a circle. We have the Sun moving in a
straight line at 220km/sec and it forms a magnetic monopole sphere
around the Sun that stretches out forming the solar ecliptic out to
the Kuiper belt and forming the Oort Cloud sphere.

The Sun creates the geometry around the Sun since it has the most mass
of the solar system. The geometry that the Sun creates is an ecliptic
plane inside a Kuiper belt plane and Oort Cloud sphere. The Oort Cloud
is spherical in shape.

So now, applying the inverse of 0.0072 equals 137, we have the
ecliptic to Kuiper belt of about 50Au.

So we have 137 * 2pi * 50Au is 43,018 Au. Now in Wikipedia they say
that the Oort Cloud is 50,000 Au, but that is just a number pulled out
of rough estimates.

Now if we go to galaxies and measure their galactic bulge, their
centers, is equivalent to the Kuiper belt and then use the same
inverse fine structure constant, we end up with the full length of the
galaxy in question.

--

Approximately 90 percent of AP's posts are missing in the Google
newsgroups author search starting May 2012. They call it indexing; I
call it censor discrimination. Whatever the case, what is needed now
is for science newsgroups like sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.bio,
sci.geo.geology, sci.med, sci.paleontology, sci.astro,
sci.physics.electromag to
be hosted by a University the same as what
Drexel
University hosts sci.math as the Math Forum. Science needs to
be in education
not in the hands of corporations chasing after the
next dollar bill.
Besides, Drexel's Math Forum can demand no fake
names of all posters which reduces or eliminates most spam and hate
spew and search engine bombing. Drexel has done a excellent, simple
and fair author-archiving of AP sci.math posts since May 2012
as seen
here :

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

Now I may have made mistakes in saying dimensionless constants and
dimensional constants in my previous post, by mixing them up in the
discussion. Pi in mathematics is a dimensionless constant only in
Euclidean geometry and is a variable in Elliptic and Hyperbolic
geometry. So pi is not a unique dimensionless constant throughout
geometry of mathematics. So is there a unique number in all of
mathematics and physics that is a dimensionless constant?

And what I wanted to say about the Fine Structure Constant of physics
is that it is a unique Dimensionless Constant when all three
geometries are used as a whole. So that the Universe has only one
unique dimensionless constant-- the Fine Structure Constant. It is
never a variable as pi is a variable when not in Euclidean geometry.

--

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

Alright, in my earlier posts of yesterday on this subject I was
outlining how the Fine Structure Constant is the only dimensionless
constant in both physics and mathematics, whereas pi is a variable
depending on type of geometry, yet the fine structure constant is a
constant independent of geometry type-- Euclidean, Elliptic and
Hyperbolic. Even the math constants of "e" or "phi" are dependent of
geometry.

In the Great Conjecture of Geometry:

Euclidean geom = Elliptic geometry unioned with Hyperbolic geometry

The only dimensionless constant in that conjecture is the Fine
Structure Constant of approximately 1/137.
The use of 1/137 gives us the closed loop of wire-- Hyperbolic
geometry, and gives us the moving bar magnet --Elliptic geometry and
gives us a flow in electric current-- Euclidean geometry. So the
number approx 1/137 is a number that interfaces with Euclidean,
Elliptic, Hyperbolic geometries simultaneously. Whereas in Old Math,
pi works only in Euclidean geometry and so does "e" and "phi".

So as we make the Maxwell Equations the axioms over all of physics,
they also produce all of mathematics as a side outcome.

Now I am still working around the geometry of the mapping of galaxies.
And slowly but surely I am getting there. Let me recap where I am at
the moment.

So far the "Universal Geometry" of what solar systems look like, what
galaxies look like what the Universe as a whole looks like and what
the inside of an atom looks like, are all the same mirror image. And
that image is best seen in the solar system.
We have the Sun as the nucleus, although in an atom the nucleus would
be several protons and neutrons with electrons in orbit. In the Solar
System the planets are in orbit (as well as the Sun also). So the
pattern of the Solar System is a ecliptic disc or plane where the
concentration and density of mass is located. Then we reach the
outskirts of this disc of ecliptic in the Kuiper belt and finally the
whole is a spherical cloud called the Oort Cloud. Now in the atom the
electrons pretty much follow a ecliptic type of form, which suggests a
new experiment that much was missed in the Rutherford scattering
experiments. The Sun is similar and dissimilar to the atom nucleus,
but the chances of colliding with a planet (an electron) is likely to
happen. So we must re-do and re-check Rutherford scattering because
some of these particles are bouncing back not from colliding with the
nucleus but from colliding with an orbiting electron. Just as a recent
comet collided into Jupiter rather than the Sun.

Anyway, the atom is geometry form similar to the Solar System and
finally the galaxies are of similar form to the Solar System where all
galaxies have a disc ecliptic. All have a center. And all have what is
called a Oort Cloud type of boundary.

And one dimensionless constant oversees all these geometries, the fine-
structure constant.

--

Approximately 90 percent of AP's posts are missing in the Google
newsgroups author search starting May 2012. They call it indexing; I
call it censor discrimination. Whatever the case, what is needed now
is for science newsgroups like sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.bio,
sci.geo.geology, sci.med, sci.paleontology, sci.astro,
sci.physics.electromag to
be hosted by a University the same as what
Drexel
University hosts sci.math as the Math Forum. Science needs to
be in education
not in the hands of corporations chasing after the
next dollar bill.
Besides, Drexel's Math Forum can demand no fake
names of all posters which reduces or eliminates most spam and hate
spew and search engine bombing. Drexel has done a excellent, simple
and fair author-archiving of AP sci.math posts since May 2012
as seen
here :

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

Apparently there are many anomalies in Rutherford scattering. So what
I am going to presume, which is well founded, is that the electrons
say for example of Oxygen atom of its 8 electrons that they orbit the
oxygen atom nucleus, much in the same way that the 8 planets form a
plane of ecliptic with the Sun and orbit the Sun.

So I want to find Rutherford scattering which proves the 8 electrons
of oxygen atom for a plane of ecliptic with the nucleus of oxygen.


--- quoting from this source found in Google under anomalies
Rutherford scattering ---

http://books.google.com/books?id=RBo...tering&f=false

For very large impact parameters (small deflection angles), the
Rutherford formula is likewise no longer exactly valid. The Coulomb
potential of the nucleus is perturbed by the atomic electrons. These
effects occur for b= 10^-10 cm (deflection angles of a few seconds of
arc) and are very difficult to detect experimentally.
--- end quote ---

1. Get PDF - Wiley Online Library
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/
pssb.2220860159/pdf
by VV Kaplin - 1978
Institute of Nuclear Physics,
Tomsk Polytechnical Institute. Quantum-Mechanical Treatment of
Anomalous Rutherford Scattering of Swift Electrons in Crystals. BY ...
2. 
Quantum-mechanical treatment of anomalous rutherford
scattering ...
onlinelibrary.wiley.com › ... › physica status solidi
(b) › Vol 86 Issue 1
by VV Kaplin - 1978
Apr 4, 2006 – Quantum-
mechanical treatment of anomalous rutherford scattering of swift
electrons in crystals. V. V. Kaplin,; D. E. Popov,; S. A. Vorobev ...
3. 
Temperature dependence of anomalous Rutherford ... - Springer
link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00892037
by AA Vorob'ev - 1978 -
Related articles
Jul 1, 1978 – In contrast to the channeling of
positively charged particles, the effect of the crystal temperature on
orientational scattering of fast electrons has ...
4. 
Temperature dependence of anomalous Rutherford ... - Springer
link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FBF00892037
by AA Vorob'ev -
1978 - Related articles
particles into the lattice and the anomalous
Rutherford scattering under channeling condi- tions [2, 3]. Detailed
discussion is carried out for 111 and ( 100) Si ...
5. 
The Physics of Atoms and Quanta: Introduction to Experiments
and ... - Page 46 - Google Books Result
books.google.com/books?
isbn=3540208070
Hermann Haken, Hans Christoph Wolf - 2005 - Computers
We come now to the so-called anomalous Rutherford scattering. In the
scattering of very fast alpha particles (E 6MeV) at large angles 9,
i.e., with small impact ...
6. 
Temperature dependence of anomalous Rutherford scattering of
fast ...
adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978SvPhJ..21..860V
by AA Vorob'ev -
1978 - Related articles
Title: Temperature dependence of anomalous
Rutherford scattering of fast electrons in crystals. Authors:
Vorob'ev, A. A.; Kaplin, V. V.; Vorob'ev, S. A.; Popov , ...
7. 
anomalies in Rutherford scattering Re - Math Forum
mathforum.org
› Discussions › sci.math.* › sci.math.independent‎
â—¦ Cached
8. 


Apr 14, 2012 – Nilsson Model anomalies in Rutherford
scattering Chapt13.4003 nucleus malleability and ductility #402
New Physics #522 ATOM ...
9. 
Rutherford's Alpha Scattering Experiment - Physics revision |
GCSE ...
http://www.cyberphysics.co.uk/topics...erford..htm‎
â—¦ Cached
â—¦ Similar
10. 


The results of this experiment were so astounding that they
made Rutherford say, ... have to be repeated many times to be sure
they were not due to anomalies!
11. 
Quantum�mechanical treatment of anomalous rutherford
scattering ...
journals2.scholarsportal.info/details.xqy?uri=/03701972/
v86i0001/...‎
â—¦ Cached
12. 


Scholars Portal - Quantum�mechanical treatment of anomalous
rutherford scattering of swift electrons in crystals.
13. 
On anomalies in elastic electron scattering cross sections from
protons
pdfserv.aip.org/JCPSA6/vol_131/iss_5/054305_1.pdf
by R Moreh -
2009 - Cited by 3 - Related articles
was reported that the e-
scattering intensities from H are anomalously lower by. 30% than that
expected from the. Rutherford formula.2,3 A similar anomaly in e-H ...
--

Approximately 90 percent of AP's posts are missing in the Google
newsgroups author search starting May 2012. They call it indexing; I
call it censor discrimination. Whatever the case, what is needed now
is for science newsgroups like sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.bio,
sci.geo.geology, sci.med, sci.paleontology, sci.astro,
sci.physics.electromag to
be hosted by a University the same as what
Drexel
University hosts sci.math as the Math Forum. Science needs to
be in education
not in the hands of corporations chasing after the
next dollar bill.
Besides, Drexel's Math Forum can demand no fake
names of all posters which reduces or eliminates most spam and hate
spew and search engine bombing. Drexel has done a excellent, simple
and fair author-archiving of AP sci.math posts since May 2012
as seen
here :

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

Compton Scattering is easier to experimentally prove that the
electrons of an atom form a "plane of ecliptic" around the nucleus of
the atom. Yesterday I was posting about a Rutherford scattering
anomalies to prove electron-plane-ecliptic but in that scattering is
used alpha particles. I need the use of photons as a better means of
proving the electron-ecliptic-plane.

Now in Compton scattering and the photoelectric effect we have photons
as the ammunition rather than alpha particles. And I was searching for
anomalies in Compton scattering. There are plenty of anomalies, but I
have not yet found the particular anomaly that is due to the fact that
the electrons of atoms and compounds form a electron-ecliptic-plane
around the nucleus.

So I am pushing forward with other chemistry data that proves the
electrons form a ecliptic plane around the nucleus of the atom. And I
need not look far at all, for the chemistry bonding of ionic,
covalent, and metallic and the Lewis structure helps prove that the
electrons must form a ecliptic plane, very similar to how the planets
form a ecliptic plane around the Sun (Sun equals nucleus).

Now I propose that the Lewis structure can fit chemical bonding so
well, only because it is a planar ecliptic of electrons. But let me go
into details in another post.

P.S. now I had a sneek peek at how many moons Jupiter has compared to
Saturn and we have 67 versus 62. Now the last stable atom on the
periodic table is lead at 82 ( bismuth was found to decay). So, what I
suspect, since the Universe is run by the Maxwell Equations that the
Sun has at least 82 planets in all. So that many of the planets lie in
the Kuiper belt. Now this is contrary to the astronomy conferences a
few years back that wanted to define whether Pluto was a planet or not
a planet. Trouble there was that they did not even have a proper
physics understanding of what gravity was, so they were helpless and
hopeless in even making any definitions of what is or is not a planet.
In the proof that the electrons orbit in a atomic plane of ecliptic, I
am going to use the Sun and planets as an analogy. For although both
the atom and Solar System are similar and both have planes of
ecliptic, the atom is a "perfect plane of ecliptic of electrons"
whereas the Solar System has many defects and nowhere near to
"perfection". But the two follow the same principle idea of a
*Universal Geometry* because both are rooted from the same set of
axioms-- Maxwell Equation. Since the Maxwell Equations have a plane of
ecliptic for electrons with a background of a sphere, then the Solar
System has a plane of ecliptic of planets with a background sphere of
the Oort Cloud.

--

Approximately 90 percent of AP's posts are missing in the Google
newsgroups author search starting May 2012. They call it indexing; I
call it censor discrimination. Whatever the case, what is needed now
is for science newsgroups like sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.bio,
sci.geo.geology, sci.med, sci.paleontology, sci.astro,
sci.physics.electromag to
be hosted by a University the same as what
Drexel
University hosts sci.math as the Math Forum. Science needs to
be in education
not in the hands of corporations chasing after the
next dollar bill.
Besides, Drexel's Math Forum can demand no fake
names of all posters which reduces or eliminates most spam and hate
spew and search engine bombing. Drexel has done a excellent, simple
and fair author-archiving of AP sci.math posts since May 2012
as seen
here :

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

Chapt15.57 ultimate meaning of the fine-structure constant 1/137, the
"pi of physics", Universal-Geometry

Chapt15.58 electrons form a plane of ecliptic around the atomic
nucleus

Chapt15.59 chemical bonding as Lewis structure as proof of electrons-
ecliptic-plane

Now these last three chapters I am discussing follow from a key idea--
Maxwell Equations as axioms demands a plane of ecliptic not just for
the large scale of the astronomy but for the small scale of the
electrons moving around a nucleus of the atom.

So, now, I want to prove that the electrons revolve around the atom in
much the same geometry as the planets revolve around the Sun in a
plane of Ecliptic.

Now it is easier to prove using Compton scattering but that technique
is a very very difficult experiment to perform with accuracy. Many of
the websites that discuss scattering point out the difficulties.

But I am optimistic and so optimistic that I feel the electron-
ecliptic-plane has already been discovered only never been correctly
interpreted. And has been filed as a Compton Scattering Anomaly. No-
one in physics, to date, ever had the idea that electrons revolve
around the atomic nucleus in a planar ecliptic, so it is easy to file
such a discovery as a anomaly, rather than looking at the data again
and seeing that it is not an anomaly but a proof that the electrons
are in a planar ecliptic. But I am not going to be waiting around for
lethargic physicists to re-open their files and data of Compton
scattering to realize a electron plane of ecliptic. I am going to push
ahead with other proof.

Another proof of electron ecliptic would be the Lewis Structure of
chemistry with its octet rule.

Can you even or ever have a Lewis structure with octet rule if the
electrons were not in a planar ecliptic? I say no.

Let me first review the Chemical Bonds. We have the ionic bond which
is a wholesome transfer of an electron from one atom to the other
atom. We have the covalent bond which is a sharing of electrons
between two atoms and finally we have the metallic bond which is a
pooling of an electron sea.

We have the Lewis diagrams of dots and of slash marks. Now the Lewis
structure works well. But can it work at all if the electrons revolved
around the nucleus without being all in a planar ecliptic?

Let us ask the same question of astronomy. Can we have planets
revolving around the Sun if they were not all in a planar ecliptic? So
here is the heart of the problem. The Maxwell Equations governs the
motion of the planets and it governs the motion of the electrons, and
what the Maxwell Equations demands of planets must be the same thing
that it demands of electrons.

Now I am jumping forward ahead to the answer. The answer is that the
Lewis Structure, the diagrams are based on an assumption that the
electrons (valence electrons, and in fact all the electrons of the
atom) form a electron ecliptic plane.

--
Approximately 90 percent of AP's posts are missing in the Google
newsgroups author search starting May 2012. They call it indexing; I
call it censor discrimination. Whatever the case, what is needed now
is for science newsgroups like sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.bio,
sci.geo.geology, sci.med, sci.paleontology, sci.astro,
sci.physics.electromag to
be hosted by a University the same as what
Drexel
University hosts sci.math as the Math Forum. Science needs to
be in education
not in the hands of corporations chasing after the
next dollar bill.
Besides, Drexel's Math Forum can demand no fake
names of all posters which reduces or eliminates most spam and hate
spew and search engine bombing, and front page-hogging. Drexel has
done a excellent, simple and fair author-archiving of AP sci.math
posts since May 2012
as seen here :

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