1) my false and inauspicious start to 9th edition ATOM TOTALITY textbook

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Feb 10, 2019, 4:22:18 PM2/10/19

to

I want to record my false start to the 9th edition. I was "feeling around" for a new picture-- rather than the electron dot cloud, I needed a new picture of the 231Pu Atom Totality that incorporates the idea of the electron being a bar magnet in Faraday Law or the coil, and the cosmic proton being either the bar magnet or the coil, or both being a coil.

+page1, PHYSICS: The PLUTONIUM ATOM TOTALITY UNIVERSE textbook by Archimedes Plutonium, 2019, 9th edition

+PHYSICS: PLUTONIUM ATOM TOTALITY UNIVERSE textbook by Archimedes Plutonium, 2019, 9th edition

Preface: a textbook and reference book to use in College sophomore physics course. There is so much fake science in the world of today-- Big Bang, black holes, General Relativity, superconductor theory, what is the proton and electron, the Bohr model of atom, quark theory, string theory, Standard Model of Physics Particles, how the Sun shines, and on and on and on. So much fake science, that I had to write this as a textbook. Why, gosh, golly, Old Physics could not even understand Angular Momentum properly ever since Newton discovered it in the 17th century, and without a proper understanding of angular momentum by 1897 JJ Thomson found a particle of .5MeV and the rest of the 20th century was so deluded with angular momentum that they thought a H2 molecule was bonded together by a proton of 938MeV to electron of .5MeV, and here the physics community of 1897 to 2017 is looking for nonsense they call dark matter, dark energy, while they cannot even get correct what the true real electron is, is in fact the muon at 105MeV and the true proton is 840MeV. So the entire physics education system around the world is all screwed up. I offer as a solution this messed-up-physics of old a solution gameplan for physics education:

So what I am going to do is write this textbook Atom Totality as a sophomore college textbook, and what I want it to serve also as the Reference or Encyclopedia function for all physics textbooks including the High School and College Freshman physics texts. Let this Atom Totality text be the guiding physics texts for all physics classes. So that we stop teaching fakery physics such as Big Bang, black holes, quark, string, Bohr atom, Standard Model, gravity as not EM, general-relativity, Bardeen Cooper Schrieffer superconductivity, dark matter, dark energy, and the huge long list of physics fakery.

What I propose is that High School Physics be almost like teaching first year electricity of electricity and magnetism much like what a electrician learns in the first year. Since most of physics is just electricity and magnetism, have High School physics be a electricity teaching. And a book like the Time Life series on electricity, teaching Ohm's law, and doing several of the experiments like Faraday's law, like Oersted's law, like Ampere's law. So have High School Physics much like teaching electricians, and teaching about electricity and magnetism.

Then for College Freshman, what needs to be taught is all the various subjects like electricity-magnetism, heat, mechanics, light and sound, only have all or most of trigonometry removed, and have all negative numbers removed. Replace -1 or negative 1 or minus 1 as "left" so say left 1 as compared to a right 1, for in physics there is no such thing as a negative area, negative volume, negative speed, negative mass. Basically Freshman college physics is -- What there is in Physics, and the units of physics. Here I am thinking of taking an old edition of Halliday & Resnick. The 1980s editions, removing all the Big Bang and black hole garbage if it had any (that is why I go back to the 1980s, when physics was not so corrupted by kook physics). Go back to an old Halliday & Resnick and refurbish it for modern day. Remove the hideous trigonometry garbage and negative number garbage, and try to have only polynomial equations in physics such as F(x) = 2x^2 +4x - 8. Math that is 1st quadrant only math, no negative numbers. So freshman college physics is get acquainted with the Topics of physics and the Units of physics, units such as Force = mass*acceleration, and acceleration = distance/time^2.

Sadly, education of the sciences has become a big business money grub affair, and almost divorced completely from the truth and reality of science. Imagination run amok where sensationalism is pandered off as being physics, and earns the money and clutters the magazines and newspapers with just horrid nonsense science fiction. Physics students these days talking of black holes and dark matter and dark energy is no better than in Massachusetts in the 1700s talking of witches, hobgoblins and ghosts.

High School Physics-- a textbook that primarily speaks to electricity and magnetism, like as if, an introduction to being a electrician. Physics is a unified theory as electricity and magnetism, so you cannot go wrong if you teach starting out students electricity and magnetism for their first year of school learning physics.

Freshman College physics-- learn the broad basic topics of physics, no trigonometry, no negative numbers, use Calculus in 1st quadrant only with polynomials and learn well the UNITS of physics-- speed, acceleration, force, angular momentum, energy etc. One can say, Freshman physics in College is learning the topics and Units of physics. And it is about time we remove all pathetic past units that no longer are clear but rather obfuscating. Trash can such units as joule, ergs, calorie, BTU, clear the deck and have only eV electron volt. Most physicists of today do not know that the forces of physics are already unified into one force= EM, and thus, all these worthless piddle paddle nonsense of hundreds of units does shame and dishonor to science.

Sophomore College physics-- the Atom Totality textbook.
--- end of proposed gameplan of physics education ---

Everything in the world is Physics, or a derivative of physics. Because the world is made up of only atoms, including the universe itself. Since the only things that exist are atoms, means every thing comes from atom structure.

In this textbook we talk mostly about Physics, but sometimes we do Chemistry and Astronomy. And sometimes we do Logic and mathematics.

So what is Physics compared to Logic, compared to Mathematics? Well both Logic and mathematics are a part of physics. Physics is the king of all subjects, and Logic and mathematics are aides or helpers to physics.

Physics is about the structure and mechanics of atoms. While Logic is the mechanics of "ideas". Ideas formed from sentences of language or sentences of mathematics. What is mathematics? Mathematics is the mechanics of numbers and the mechanics of geometry shapes. Mathematics exists only because Physics atoms are many and numerous, thus, creating numbers, and atoms have geometry shapes causing geometry to exist.

If any student has taken Archimedes Plutonium's Teaching True Mathematics textbook will greatly aid the student in all the math presented in this book.

I am going to write this textbook for the sophomore College student, and sometimes I will be speaking to the teacher.

Let us get started.

Very crude dot picture of 5f6 magnetosphere of 231Pu Atom Totality

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::

One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And
each dot represents another galaxy. The Y is the Cosmic nucleus.

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Feb 10, 2019, 4:24:17 PM2/10/19

to

And first I need a picture of the Plutonium Atom Totality to refer to. I explain the picture in various chapters, but for the moment I need a picture as reference.

Very crude dot-coil picture of 5f6, the last 6 protons and 6 muons of 5f6 of 231Plutonium Atom.
Proton dot-cloud Coil of 231Pu
The 6 protons make up 3 coils of 3 toruses. The windings of the tori are dots (I have dashes because of limitations on ascii art) and a dot (or dash) represents a galaxy.
The 6 muon electrons for these 6 protons are inside the proton coil tori, 2 muons to each of the three tori, and are bar magnets that do a Faraday law (we learn what Faraday law is later) inside each atom.

One of those dots (or dashes) is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot or dash represents another galaxy.
| | . .
| | . .
| | . .
| | . .
----------------------------
(Y) torus3
----------------------------
. . | |
. . | |
. . | |
. . | |
torus1 torus2

The Y center of the above atom are the holes of the 3 tori, and in that hole lies more smaller tori and resided the neutrons of the Atom.

Teacher, bring to class three circle rings where you form third dimension. First take three pencils forming third dimension

__|/__
/|

Have the students form three dimensions, the xy, the xz the yz, each 90 degrees from the other.

Next, have the students cut long strips of paper and scotch tape the ends to form loops of paper. And have three loops forming the three axes.

__|/__
/|

Then do it on three loops of circle rings. I used three fish stringers shaped more like ellipse-ovals.

Students: do not be worried if you do not understand much of the above, for all of these ideas will be explained in due course time. What is important is to get an image in your mind of the inside of an atom. Think of three loops of tori. Not much further off as a diagram that was used in the 1950s

\|/
/|\

Where they had tiny electron balls moving around those three loops. You can still see that symbol on radioactive buildings and doors.

So in this first page, I want to get a picture into the minds of students, and we explain the picture in the chapters below.

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Feb 10, 2019, 4:25:46 PM2/10/19

to

page2 Generator picture: PLUTONIUM ATOM TOTALITY UNIVERSE textbook by Archimedes Plutonium, 2019, 9th edition with the discovery the Real Electron = 105 MeV, Real Proton = 840MeV, .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole

Starting in the early 1990s I drew a picture of the 5f6 of plutonium using Schrodinger Equation, and the ascii of it became this.

Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::

One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And
each dot represents another galaxy.

And it made sense with the night sky that the pattern of stars and galaxies seemed to be haphazard dots of white light. And I thought it was a electron dot cloud pattern, so I used that picture for decades, from 1993 to 2019. Then in 2017 I had the inspiration that the real true electron was the muon, afterall, not the .5MeV particle JJ Thomson discovered in 1897. Then in 2018, the fallout of that discovery just kept coming and coming and coming, so that the Sun and stars do not shine from fusion, no, but shine from Faraday's law going on inside of atoms. That the muon was thrusting through a proton coil and producing magnetic monopoles that are stored in neutrons or emitted as radiation by the Sun or stars.

So what was once a rather static picture of the cosmos as

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::

Was going to have to take a hit of a big change. I could not say the dots of the electron cloud represent galaxies, for the muon is a bar magnet in Faradays law, plunging through the windings of a proton at 840MeV and so where the electron dot cloud now becomes a bar magnet. This means the galaxies must be dots of the proton dot cloud.

But that leaves an ugly prospect that the cosmic 6 muons of 231Pu are some huge massive objects thrusting through the night sky. One relief of that prospect is to think of the muon as a dot cloud ring itself thrusting through proton rings of 8 windings.

So the above picture was changed by 2019 to look like this:

| | . .
| | . .
| | . .
| | . .
----------------------------
(Y) torus3
----------------------------
. . | |
. . | |
. . | |
. . | |
torus1 torus2

Where the protons form torus rings and has the muons inside as bar magnets thrusting and creating magnetic monopoles (electricity). And we actually do have some astronomy evidence of a cosmic ring of galaxies.

--- quoting ---  http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/jarrett/papers/LSS/
The third layer (0.01 < z < 0.02) is dominated by the P-P  supercluster   (left side of image) and the P-I supercluster extending up into the   ZoA terminating as the Great Attractor region (notably Abell 3627)   disappears behind a wall of Milky Way stars. An intriguing "ring" or   chain of galaxies seems to circle/extend from the northern to the   southern Galactic hemisphere (see also Figure 1). It is unknown   whether this ring-like structure is physically associated with the   cosmic web or an artifact of projection.
--- end quoting ---

What I would like to see happen is reports of more cosmic rings, rings together or nearby one another to substantiate the idea of windings of a cosmic proton.

But there are two possible means of doing the Faraday Law-- the generator type of thrusting bar magnet through closed loops, and the second type is a battery configuration of plates separated by a ion fluid.

So I have two choices, the cosmos is a generator type or is a battery type. With the generator type I run into the problem of the muon being unworldly huge as we are a planet stuck in the walls of a torus proton, and if that muon thrusts anywhere near us, would end Earth. Or the battery choice, that the muon is dot cloud of a cosmic ion liquid and the protons and neutrons are plates of a battery.

With the scant evidence from astronomy so far, I am going to choose the Proton dot cloud as windings of a coil and for the muons I am going to make them dot clouds of 1 winding and acting as bar magnet.

So if astronomers happen to see another ring of galaxies where it looks like the entire ring is passing on through or passing by another ring of galaxies, would be supporting evidence of the generator model.

So this is the best picture I can do for the moment. Based on astronomy evidence, and based on notions of Faraday Law and chemistry of orbitals. So think of this picture not fixed for years or decades but think of it as a working model, and easily changed by any new news or by insights.

| | . .
| | . .
| | . .
| | . .
----------------------------
(Y) torus3
----------------------------
. . | |
. . | |
. . | |
. . | |
torus1 torus2

Those are 6 protons, 2 each forming a closed torus, all three having a elliptical shape and all three at 90degrees from one another. In an ellipse, think of a torus and then another torus at right angles aligned with the major axis of first and the third torus aligned with the minor axis of the first. The as we add on more orbitals, we just include a new one on the major or minor axis of the prior ellipse torus. So the torus walls are the protons windings and the two muons that fill a suborbital thrust inside the proton torus walls. The muon is one winding of a dot cloud. How do I fit the neutron into this picture? Well the neutron is a capacitor that is being filled by magnetic monopoles produced from the muon proton tori. Are the neutrons in the nucleus of the atom? To me best guess they are. But perhaps the neutrons are just some more proton windings. So that in helium with its 2 protons and 2 neutrons, the protons have 8 windings while the neutron when full has 9 windings and maybe those windings are added to the torus.

So, my picture is temporary, it is the best I can think of at the moment. It can change any day. But I need a picture and so, this is the best I have so far. I even consulted with knowledge on the electric eel, its body design. For I would think the atom is so engineered as to produce Maximum Electricity as its goal. And so, how does a atom achieve maximum electricity? Is it the generator model or the battery model?

So, let the reader beware, this picture is temporary and may change drastically at any future time, even before I get to the end of this edition of 2019. But I need a picture and this is the best I have for the moment.

| | . .
| | . .
| | . .
| | . .
----------------------------
(Y) torus3
----------------------------
. . | |
. . | |
. . | |
. . | |
torus1 torus2

Three tori, each of 2 proton dot clouds, each tori containing 2 unpaired muons (Hund's rule) that are thrusting bar magnets. The neutrons are in the center of the atom at Y.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Feb 10, 2019, 4:26:48 PM2/10/19

to

page3, Battery picture: PLUTONIUM ATOM TOTALITY UNIVERSE textbook by Archimedes Plutonium, 2019, 9th edition with the discovery the Real Electron = 105 MeV, Real Proton = 840MeV, .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole

However, there is the other picture of the Universe, we must consider. Instead of the Generator of thrusting bar magnet, the Battery picture of the universe. We have one piece of evidence for the Generator picture in Jarrett's ring. However, within that same observation is mentioned the Great Attractor. And a battery is a great attractor of the fluid ions. Could we have had a electric creature like the electric eel that lived on dry land without being immersed in a fluid?

--- quoting ---  http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/jarrett/papers/LSS/
The third layer (0.01 < z < 0.02) is dominated by the P-P  supercluster   (left side of image) and the P-I supercluster extending up into the   ZoA terminating as the Great Attractor region (notably Abell 3627)   disappears behind a wall of Milky Way stars. An intriguing "ring" or   chain of galaxies seems to circle/extend from the northern to the   southern Galactic hemisphere (see also Figure 1). It is unknown   whether this ring-like structure is physically associated with the   cosmic web or an artifact of projection.
--- end quoting ---

That paragraph by Jarrett is very vague, for it does not tell me if the Great Attractor is in P-P or P-I or did he mean to say in both. Remember in logic: Either..Or..Or.. Both is a contradiction of Boole Logic and here Jarrett is using a contradiction.

But Astronomy as of 2019 is primitive, very primitive, for our first bits of evidence of what the World is all about is the above paragraph, even though it is self-contradictory. Our astronomy of the Cosmos is so primitive that I would say, we are at the stage of before Tycho Brahe of 16th century who was collecting data, and the above is just at the start of Tycho Brahe, so that along comes Kepler and Newton in the 17th century to put all the observed data together and to render to us our solar system. So the above Jarrett of the Cosmos is like the first set of data that Tycho Brahe found in the 16th century.

What is the Battery Model of the Cosmos? Remember, both the Battery and Generator models are Faraday Law.

The battery model is plates of metal separated by a fluid electrolyte that is in motion and for which that motion causes magnetic monopoles of the plates to be created. Instead of a thrusting bar magnet through a closed loop wire. We have a magnetic field by ions in motion creating monopoles on metal plates.

Since the Cosmos has a Great Attractor, and likely many Great Attractors as being a plate of a Cosmic Battery and the ions in fluid motion would be the many galaxies and their stars, in motion towards this plate.

Battery Model
______
| |
| |
|_____|
* *
*______
| |
| |
|_____|
* *
*______
| |
| |
|_____|
* *
*

So in the Battery picture of the Cosmos, the plates would be composed of many galaxies that form a ring, call it a Ring-Plate, such as the PP & PI described by Jarrett. And in between the ring-plate would be mobile independent galaxies moving towards a plate such as the Great Attractor plate.

The beauty of the Generator model, is that we actually do begin to see Cosmic Rings of Galaxies as the PP and PI. But the disadvantages of that model is galaxies have to form closed loops like a wire, and we do not perceive galaxies as wires, and Hund's rule and the muon would be huge, destroying a Earth if ever in its thrusting motion.

The beauty of the Battery model, is that we actually witnessed a Great Attractor, of the galaxies acting as Cosmic ions in motion towards the Attractor. Disadvantages, you need galaxies as metal plates, almost as if solid metal plates. You need some galaxies as ions as a fluid in motion.

Maybe the two models can come together and eliminate the weaknesses of one another.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Feb 10, 2019, 5:37:17 PM2/10/19

to

The Atom Totality theory discovered by me in 1990 was based on the idea of a picture that the stars and galaxies were dots of the electron dot cloud of the 231Pu Atom Totality. Think of the electron as a huge massive ball, and now smash that ball into fine powder and spread the powder into the entire Vacuum of Space where one dot of this powder is a star, and a larger dot is a galaxy. In Quantum Mechanics, electrons are dot clouds.

But by 2017, I discovered the true proton is 840MeV and true electron is not the JJ Thomson particle of 1897 but rather, what Thomson discovered was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole. The true electron would be discovered around 1930s and called the muon which has 105MeV.

That changes everything, for if the true electron = muon and proton is 840MeV implies they are not dot cloud pictures but rather, they are Faraday's Law of one being a magnet and the other being a coil to produce electricity.

That is why I am having difficulty in starting the 9th edition. I need the new picture of atoms with their muons and attendant protons doing a Faraday Law, not a dot cloud picture.

For the dot cloud picture of Quantum Mechanics was not the electron, but the Dirac Magnetic Monopoles. The dot cloud was spots of charged photons of light. Not the rest mass of a shattered fine powder of a electron ball.

AP