spin gravity of Jupiter can wreck Juno; - curlxE = dB + S_B; gravity is Faraday/AP law with spin displacement

[Archimedes Plutonium]

In Newtonian gravity, there is no spin imparted on either of the two gravitational masses involved.

In General Relativity gravity, there is no spin transfer on either of the two gravitational masses involved.

Only when it is recognized that gravity is EM, in the Faraday law of Maxwell theory do we have a spin transfer involved. The thrusting bar magnet (Sun) through a closed loop wire is the orbiting of a electron (Earth), but also, a transfer of spin upon Earth by Sun.

--- quoting ---
https://www.quora.com/Does-the-ISS-always-face-the-Earth
So, if we say the ISS is flying LVLH 0,0,0 we are saying that the body axis is perfectly superimposed on top of the LVLH axis.  In reality, ISS is usually deviated from this (a biased attitude), often 5-10 degrees off-axis.  We describe the station attitude either using yaw-pitch-roll Euler angles or by a quaternion.  We fly the bias to align the vehicle with a TEA (Torque Equilibrium Attitude).  A TEA is an attitude at which the gravitational torques and the atmospheric torques will best cancel each other out, over the 90 minute orbit.  Flying a TEA reduces the amount of work the CMGs (Control Moment Gyroscopes) have to do to maintain attitude control.
--- end quoting ---

From this website we see a spin rotation of ISS of 10 degrees per minute deviation on top of the 4 degree per minute that ISS is intended to have. So we see a maximum of 14 degrees per minute, possible.

Now Juno has a huge intended spin of 5rpm which is 5*360 = 1800 degrees per minute. Compare that to ISS with a 4+10 = 14 degrees per minute. Hitomi, in comparison, was 20 degrees per hour which is 20/60 = 1/3 degree per minute.

So, apparently ISS can withstand 14 degrees per minute spin rotation, but it is quickly brought under control to be a 4 degree per minute spin. ISS does this controlling by automatic reaction wheels.

So, here, the question is, why was there never a scientist curious enough as to ask where this extra 10 degree per minute spin comes from? Was there never a scientist curious as why and how ISS picks up these extraneous spins? And can these spins harm ISS, for apparently the spin destroyed Hitomi early this year.

You see, gravity is not the phony baloney of a Newton gravity nor the phony baloney of a General Relativity gravity, but rather, gravity is Faraday's law with a displacement spin term.

- curlxE = dB + S_B  the Faraday/Lenz/AP law with a displacement spin S_B
curlxB = dE + J_E    the Ampere/Maxwell law with displacement current J_E

Earlier this year, Hitomi, the Japanese X-ray telescope that broke up in orbit was due to the fact that NASA and other scientists were going by Newton and GR gravity, not realizing that gravity has a spin term, and so Hitomi broke in pieces, after a mere 20 degree spin per hour, not per minute but per hour.

And now we have Juno around Jupiter and the scientists are still in the error filled understanding of GR with Newton gravity. And that Juno is highly likely of being destroyed due to spin out of control. Even if Juno gains too much spin, Juno has not enough power to put that extra spin under control and will be destroyed by Jupiter's displacement spin in Faraday/AP law.

So, is ISS safe, by not knowing what gravity really is?

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Alright, let me write this so I keep them straight.

Hitomi had a 20 degree per hour spin that destroyed it

ISS has a intended 4 degree per minute spin but experiences additional 10 degrees per minute spin

Juno has a intended 1 to 5 rpm, revolutions per minute spin, and as to what Jupiter will transfer spin upon Juno is as yet unknown

Now there is a flyby or slingshot effect anomaly. I need to check up on that anomaly and see if it is spin that is inputed upon the spacecraft.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Now actually we can ask those astronauts who walked in space, whether they felt or experienced a spin type of force upon them.

iPhone post

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Now here is what Wikipedia says about the flyby anomaly:

--- quoting ---
The flyby anomaly is an unexpected energy increase during Earth-flybys of spacecraft. This anomaly has been observed as shifts in the S-band and X-band doppler and ranging telemetry. Taken together it causes a significant unaccounted velocity increase of up to 13 mm/s during flybys.[1] Numerically larger discrepancies (400–1000 m) have been observed at least in one flyby (NEAR) against Space Surveillance Network (SSN) radars.
--- end quoting ---

Now I wonder if the flyby increase in energy seen as an increase in velocity is really just an increase in energy as "spin energy" which gets translated into orbital velocity increase.

So when the flyby energy is increased, means some spin energy was imparted onto the spacecraft. Sometimes the spin energy is not applied upon the vessel for it was not in flyby long enough.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 11:53:10 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Now here is what Wikipedia says about the flyby anomaly:
>
> --- quoting ---
> The flyby anomaly is an unexpected energy increase during Earth-flybys of spacecraft. This anomaly has been observed as shifts in the S-band and X-band doppler and ranging telemetry. Taken together it causes a significant unaccounted velocity increase of up to 13 mm/s during flybys.[1] Numerically larger discrepancies (400–1000 m) have been observed at least in one flyby (NEAR) against Space Surveillance Network (SSN) radars.
> --- end quoting ---
>

So now, mm per second is not much to crow about, but 400-1000 m is something to worry about.

Now, when Hitomi broke up, the spinning out of control, is it, by translation a 400 m energy break up.

[Archimedes Plutonium]

So, let me write the Faraday law in terms of Sun and Earth and in terms of thrusting bar magnet through closed loop of wire.

In thrusting bar magnet through closed loop of wire we have electrons of no spin, only charge -1 moving in orbit of the wire. And the Faraday law written to describe this would be


- curlxE = dB

Now in terms of Sun and Earth, the Sun is a thrusting forward of a bar magnet and Earth is stuck in the Positron Sea of the Sun where the positrons form a track or pathway, and the unbalanced charges of Earth (remember charge as gravity is 10^40 stronger than gravity of mass) forces the Earth to go around in orbit of the Sun. Here again we have this

- curlxE = dB

Now, however, there is something missing in Faraday law or Faraday Lenz law and that something is spin. Not only does the thrusting bar magnet make the charge go around, but it makes the charge itself go around in a spin. So we have this:

- curlxE = dB + S_B the Faraday/AP law with a displacement spin S_B

And as for Sun and Earth, not only does the Sun force Earth to orbit around but forces Earth to have a spin around on axis.

- curlxE = dB + S_B the Faraday/AP law with a displacement spin S_B

AP

But what is missing in both

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Good, now here is where I derive the four quantum numbers , N, L, m_L, m_s

On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 1:25:57 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> So, let me write the Faraday law in terms of Sun and Earth and in terms of thrusting bar magnet through closed loop of wire.
>
> In thrusting bar magnet through closed loop of wire we have electrons of no spin, only charge -1 moving in orbit of the wire. And the Faraday law written to describe this would be
>
>
> - curlxE = dB
>

So here we have the object, the thrusting bar magnet as N

And the electron here is L, angular momentum

And m_L is the closed loop wire, the track on which the electron moves

And m_s is the spin on that electron

> Now in terms of Sun and Earth, the Sun is a thrusting forward of a bar magnet and Earth is stuck in the Positron Sea of the Sun where the positrons form a track or pathway, and the unbalanced charges of Earth (remember charge as gravity is 10^40 stronger than gravity of mass) forces the Earth to go around in orbit of the Sun. Here again we have this
>
> - curlxE = dB
>

Now here the Sun is N

And L is the angular momentum of Earth

And m_L is track of positron Space created by the Sun

And m_s is the spin on the Earth on its axis

> Now, however, there is something missing in Faraday law or Faraday Lenz law and that something is spin. Not only does the thrusting bar magnet make the charge go around, but it makes the charge itself go around in a spin. So we have this:
>
> - curlxE = dB + S_B the Faraday/AP law with a displacement spin S_B
>
> And as for Sun and Earth, not only does the Sun force Earth to orbit around but forces Earth to have a spin around on axis.
>
> - curlxE = dB + S_B the Faraday/AP law with a displacement spin S_B
>

So here we see how the full Faraday law which is Faraday/Lenz law and with the added term of spin as the Faraday/Lenz/AP law, we see how this full law derives the four quantum numbers.

Now I remember in the history of quantum numbers, there was only three of them for a long time, missing the fourth of m_s.

AP

[noTthaTguY]

fifty-seven minutes after you,
does not constitute stalking, but
I wish that I had another stocking ... mass_sub_s-sometning

[reber g=emc^2]

Is it dead or alive. Jupiter's gravity can create heat too.TreBert

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Now in Halliday & Resnick, the best physics text written before mine, Physics, part 2, Extended Version, 1986, before mine because it does not contain the baloney and hogwash of Big Bang, black holes, worm holes, dark matter, dark energy, Doppler redshift as motion, Higgs boson, quarks, string theory, quarks, Standard Model and thousands of other fruitcake crackpot nonsense that floods through physics.

Anyway, getting back on track of deriving the 4 Quantum Numbers from just the Faraday/Lenz/AP law.

On page 1174 of H&R, they describe N as principal quantum number associated with energy.

They describe L and m_L as orbital and magnetic quantum numbers associated with orbital angular momentum. And on that same page allude to the m_s as an intrinsic spin of the electron.

On page 1116, H&R discuss the Correspondence Principle by Bohr, and I need to derive it from Maxwell theory. You see, the Maxwell theory serves as the axioms over all of physics, provided we include the Atomic Theory as a axiom of Maxwell theory. And as a axiom system over all of physics, we derive all the major ideas and principles out of Maxwell theory.

So the idea of Quantum Mechanics itself as packets of energy or packets of momentum with its 4 quantum numbers, N, L, m_L and m_s, well those 4 numbers are all derived from Faraday's law extended by a intrinsic spin S_B in the equation

- curlxE = dB + S_B the Faraday/AP law with a displacement spin S_B

curlxB = dE + J_E the Ampere/Maxwell law with displacement current J_E

The Faraday law was incomplete until I added the missing term S_B, just as the Ampere law was incomplete until Maxwell added the displacement current.

Now it is fascinating to read the history of why it took so long to include the 4th quantum number m_s, but then again, physicists are a conservative lot of thinkers and only include things when forced to include, not when it is prudent to include. They do this because they love to spend more time on their science fictions of Big Bang, black holes, etc etc listed above.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 6:39:02 PM UTC-5, is this stalker John Baez? UC Riverside; spending more time stalking and airhead posts than doing physics

> fifty-seven minutes after you,
> does not constitute stalking, but
> I wish that I had another stocking ... mass_sub_s-sometning
>

So I was reading about Richard Feynman's liposarcoma in Wikipedia, where it says he had an abdominal mass the size of a football.

Funny, I had a liposarcoma mass removed in March of this year, the size of a small watermelon. I thought I was just putting on weight during the winter months.

The only thing that caused me to go to the doctors, since all my life I never had any illness or disease and visited the doctors only twice in my life-- broken leg age 21 and a checkup at age 60 to see if my prostate was good. So I never went to the doctors, only if really really sick. I went in January 2016 because I could not get rid of a cough. A cough that had dogged me for about a year. After the removal of the tumor, the cough was completely absent.

What had happened was the tumor-- a right rear peritoneal liposarcoma, a fat cell cancer had pressed my kidney and liver up against my diaphragm and causing the lungs to cough whenever I kneeled down.
Before I had the CAT scan to prove I had a mass, I said to myself that I did not have cancer because of the simple fact that when I slept at night, no cough. When I got up and started the day, the cough would return.

So I wonder, if Feynman also had a cough to alert him if something was wrong?

Now Feynman lived from 1978 to 1988 with the liposarcoma, which is ten years, and I hope I can live another 10 years. But it looks as though mine is a dedifferentiated mass which is easy to metastasize.

With cancer, I suspect the most horrifying news is metastasize. When you are told "you have cancer" it takes a long time to sink in, that you are in a fight for your life. But when the news is -- metastasize-- it is all over, but the crying.

If mine metastasizes, it probably will show up in the lungs. I have switched all my handkerchiefs to white so that I can immediately recognize blood from my lungs.

Now did Feynman's liposarcoma metastasize and was it the lungs. Wikipedia says he had two surgeries after the removal surgery. And surgery seems the best treatment of liposarcoma rather than a chemotherapy regimen.

Did Feynman have the cough? Did Feynman's mass metastasize into the lungs?

Did Feynman ever raise suspicions of what caused his cancer? Did he think chemicals such as DDT, or 2,4-D or pesticides?

I probably will never definitely know what caused my mass, but I will always question and look for an answer.

I heard that the Mayo clinic is researching into 2,4-D as a cause among many causes for breast cancer.

Is our modern day research good enough to whittle down the cell that caused my tumor and to find out what in that single cell went wrong-- was it DDT in chocolates or 2,4-D in foods or pesticides in food?

Can we research the cell that grows a tumor the size of a football (Feynman's mass). Or mine, the size of a small watermelon?

Now medicine has advanced a lot since Feynman's 1978-1988. So I may have 10 more years, but when it comes to cancer, be a realist and prepare for the worst.

If anyone knows anything about Feynman's fight with liposarcoma, his son or daughter, I would really be sincerely appreciative of any information.

I wonder if it is true that UK survey shows a spike increase in liposarcoma-- 14 percent rise in the past 10 years, which would indicate a chemical in the environment is the main culprit.

Any information or answers are appreciated.

It is reported that Feynman's last words were: "I'd hate to die twice. It's so boring"
Maybe mine would be: "I'd hate to have more surgeries, for IV needles and catheters are horrors, and no need to watch a horror movie-- just have IV and catheters insertions" And I think Feynman was suffering from a lot of pain at the end there, not boredom.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Now I am confused because Wikipedia in March & April 2016, had this to say about Feynman:

Death[edit]
Feynman had two rare forms of cancer, liposarcoma and Waldenström's macroglobulinemia. Shortly after a final attempt at surgery for the former, he died at the UCLA Medical Center on February 15, 1988, aged 69.[38] His last words are noted as, "I'd hate to die twice. It's so boring."[38][64]

Whereas in July, now, 2016, no mention of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, as if he never had a second cancer. So, what is the true full story?

Death[edit]
In 1978, Feynman sought medical treatment for abdominal pains, and he was diagnosed with liposarcoma, a rare form of cancer. Surgeons removed a tumor the size of a football that had crushed his kidney and spleen. Further operations were performed in October 1986 and October 1987.[147] Near the end of his life schemed to visit the Russian land of Tuva, a dream that, because of Cold War bureaucratic problems, never became reality. The day after he died, a letter arrived for him from the Soviet government, giving him authorization to travel to Tuva. Later Feynman's daughter Michelle would undertake the journey.[148]
Feyman was hospitalized at the the UCLA Medical Center again on February 3, 1988. A ruptured duodenal ulcer caused kidney failure, and he declined dialysis that might have prolonged his life for a few months. Watched over by his wife Gweneth, sister Joan and cousin Frances Lewine, he died on February 15, 1988.[149] He was buried in Mountain View Cemetery and Mausoleum in Altadena.[150] His last words were: "I'd hate to die twice. It's so boring."[148]

AP

Want to know the true full story.

AP

[noTthaTguY]

cOOl; can you give a précis for the Nobelist(s

[The Starmaker]

Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>
> Now I am confused because Wikipedia in March & April 2016, had this to say about Feynman:
>
> Death[edit]
> Feynman had two rare forms of cancer, liposarcoma and Waldenström's macroglobulinemia. Shortly after a final attempt at surgery for the former, he died at the UCLA Medical Center on February 15, 1988, aged 69.[38] His last words are noted as, "I'd hate to die twice. It's so boring."[38][64]
>
> Whereas in July, now, 2016, no mention of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, as if he never had a second cancer. So, what is the true full story?
>
> Death[edit]
> In 1978, Feynman sought medical treatment for abdominal pains, and he was diagnosed with liposarcoma, a rare form of cancer. Surgeons removed a tumor the size of a football that had crushed his kidney and spleen. Further operations were performed in October 1986 and October 1987.[147] Near the end of his life schemed to visit the Russian land of Tuva, a dream that, because of Cold War bureaucratic problems, never became reality. The day after he died, a letter arrived for him from the Soviet gov

> Feyman was hospitalized at the the UCLA Medical Center again on February 3, 1988. A ruptured duodenal ulcer caused kidney failure, and he declined dialysis that might have prolonged his life for a few months. Watched over by his wife Gweneth, sister Joan and cousin Frances Lewine, he died on February 15, 1988.[149] He was buried in Mountain View Cemetery and Mausoleum in Altadena.[150] His last words were: "I'd hate to die twice. It's so boring."[148]
>
> AP
>
> Want to know the true full story.
>
> AP

feynman had cancer from being exposed to making atomic bombs, like
everyone else..Ferni, etc..
including Albert Einstein....but, you're not suppose to know that so
don't tell anyone.

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Now in Oxtoby, Nachtrieb, Principles of Modern Chemistry, 1990, page 502 speaks of the N, principal quantum number, and L, the angular momentum quantum number, and then m_L as the magnetic quantum number.

On page 494 shows a circular standing wave as principal quantum number.

And on page 508 speaks of the spin quantum number m_s.

Now translate those 4 quantum numbers to the Sun and Earth would be that Sun creates a standing wave N and that Sun is the thrusting bar magnet through Space in which Earth is given a orbital momentum L on the N standing wave track. But Earth is also given a m_L magnetic angular momentum, a rotation angular momentum upon a spin track of Earth axis m_s.

Now, translating this to Juno around Jupiter, in the Jupiter creates a standing wave track of N, in which Juno follows one of those N tracks and given orbital angular momentum L, but also, Jupiter causes a m_L rotation or spin angular momentum upon Juno with a spin axis of m_s. Now, does Juno have enough energy to constantly correct these imparted motions of m_L and m_s upon Juno? I doubt it and so in the 2nd or 3rd revolution around Jupiter, Juno is likely to be in deep trouble.

AP

[reber g=emc^2]

Feynman died in bed his wife holding his hand that he kept squeezing till the end. I will not die in bed holding onto a love one's hand. Reason "Its been over done".I will die a viking's death,sailing my boat tied to its mast and heading from Huntington Beach to Hawaii. Its my final quest.My boat could make the long trip.my last act will set the sail,but no matter how I set my sail I will not make it. sad but true.Death is part of live.At 88 I'm still sailing along with the wind on my back,and my back is curved.O ya Well I'm big on curves,as my latest posts show. Trebert

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Now in CHEM ONE, Waser, Trueblood, Knobler, 1980, pages 314-315, they discuss the N, L as Radial parts and call L the azimuthal quantum number. They describe m_L as the Angular part, and they describe spin m_s on page 318.

Now, what is neat about CHEM ONE description is that the Sun and Earth would be described by N, L, m_L and m_s as the track that Sun follows is N, and track that Earth follows around the Sun is L, and that m_L is the Earth angular momentum going around the L track, and that Earth spinning on axis is the m_s.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Chemistry, the Central Science, 5th ed, Brown & LeMay & Bursten, 1991, on page 185, starts talking about "Orbitals and Quantum Numbers" describing the "principal quantum number N" then the "azimuthal quantum number L" and then the "magnetic quantum number m_L". Later on page 193, they talk about the spin quantum number m_s.

The reason I am talking about the quantum numbers is to show how these numbers are derived from the Faraday law of Maxwell equations. Where each number relates to either the bar magnet moving or the closed loop wire or the electron moving in the closed loop wire.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

News of Juno??

I thought they (NASA) was supposed to do a 54 day orbit without any pictures taken, and then start a 37 revolutions of 14 days each.

Instead I see a stream of photos and the 14 day orbits is now 11 days.

Is Juno in big trouble??

AP

[noTthaTguY]

oh, eleven days?... hm

[Archimedes Plutonium]

So what made NASA change its plans of 37 science orbits each of 14 days to 37 science orbits each of 11 days?
p
Is Juno gaining unwanted spin, which it cannot correct? Is it the start of the end of the Juno and will break apart as did Hitomi spacecraft earlier this year? If Juno breaks apart now, it will have given us no more information than what we already knew about Jupiter and its environment. But, if it breaks apart now, the greatest lesson Juno will give us-- is the correct theory of What is Gravity? Since gravity is not Newton nor General Relativity, but rather, gravity is the Faraday law with a add spin term S_B.

- curlxE = dB + S_B the Faraday/AP law with a displacement spin S_B
curlxB = dE + J_E the Ampere/Maxwell law with displacement current J_E

You know how some stubborn and dumb people need a slap across the face, so they stop their dumbery and start to wake up about the truth. Hitomi was not a slap across the face but Juno breaking up will be that slap across the face.

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

So, who is corrupting the news on Juno spacecraft?

Some websites are saying Juno goes into 14 day orbits while other websites say 11 day orbits.

Is NASA doing this confusion?

iPhone post

AP

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Alright, I read that Juno has downloaded 1300 pictures, is this a omen of desperation that is destruction? Download now before it is destroyed?

Hitomi broke apart a few months ago this year. Is Juno spinning out of control as did Hitomi?

AP

[noTthaTguY]

download at all times not blocked by other a)
planets not Rrth

[pnal...@gmail.com]

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=6581&utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NASAJPL&utm_content=daily20160729-1

[reber g=emc^2]

Best we give up on heaven,and hell.Stay with reality.We were created from dust,and will go back to dust.Think Vacuum. TreBert

[edpr...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 6:48:14 PM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Alright, I read that Juno has downloaded 1300 pictures, is this
> a omen of desperation that is destruction? Download now before it is destroyed?
>

"We're in an excellent state of health, with the spacecraft and all the instruments fully checked out and ready for our first up-close look at Jupiter," said Rick Nybakken, Juno project manager at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California.

Doesn't sound like desperation to me. :)

ed

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Ask Rick how many times has NASA had to desaturate the reaction wheels (gyros) of Juno since July4? Has it been 8 times now?

AP

[noTthaTguY]

do NASAoids give any explanation

[reber g=emc^2]

Best Juno go in with the direction of Jupiter's spin.A little faster would be nice TreBert

[noTthaTguY]

hm; it so rare, for you to give gOOd query

[edpr...@gmail.com]

no need to give explanation for normal operations.

You guys are just silly.

[Michael J. Strickland]

Are you referring to moisture "desaturation" or magnetic
"desaturation"?

If moisture, why are the reaction wheels exposed to the elements?

Is there a leak in the hermetically sealed reaction wheels?

---------------------------------------------------
Michael J. Strickland Reston, VA
---------------------------------------------------

[noTthaTguY]

questionaire excellente, but
a.p will pretend that he already thought of it,
to forget it