#513 science book by AP--- Gravity Model then Battery Model// physics

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 11, 2026, 7:26:45 PM (10 days ago) Jul 11

to Plutonium Atom Universe

One of my most difficult physics challenges in my life--- model how a battery works and especially a rechargeable battery.

Extremely difficult because the 0.5MeV particle is the Dirac Magnetic Monopole and not what 99% of the physics and chemistry professor goofballs call the electron of atoms. The electron of Atoms is the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus and doing the Faraday law-structure with the proton torus.

So, every textbook that says the electron is 0.5MeV is outdated junk and their interpretation of how a battery works is just pitiful goofball.

But to get to a clear model of how a battery works, I want to point out the model of how Gravity works, as to help me understand how a battery works.

This is extremely difficult phsyics and I need all the help I can get.

--- quoting from my 62nd book of science---

7) Principle of Gravity

PRINCIPLE OF GRAVITY: Gravity occurs when two objects exist in Space and that Space is composed of a Voltage Field, Space is a Voltage Field. This Voltage Field are successive closed loops. Both objects have a magnetic field and as one object moves through the Voltage Field of the other object those lines of force are cut producing electricity and this electricity impels the object to move along the tracks of the Voltage Field.

Here I want the students and teacher to spend a day with an experiment in class of a sheet of paper or enclosed plastic container that holds iron filings. And with a bar magnet, form a picture of the Magnetic Field of Lines of Force. They should resemble these pictures:

__
__..=......._ | | _.......=..__
,-; :=._ | | _.=: ;-,
_,' _____`-:. | | .:-'_____ `,_
/ _.-'' `-.::. | | .::.-' ``-._ \
,' ,' _,,,_`:. | | .:'_,,,_ `, `,
.' ,' ,' `,`.| |.',' `, `, `.
| ,' ,' `,| |,' `, `, |
| | .' || || `. | |
| | | || || | | |
| | | || || | | |
| \ \ || || / / |
\ \ \ .'| |`. / / /
\ \ `.____.-' || || `-.____.' / /
\ `._ .'|| ||`. _.' /
`. `-.._______.-' | | `-._______..-' .'
`._ __.-' | | `-.__ _.'
`.._ _;-' |__| `-;_ _..'
`'------'' ``------`'

Pictures of going around. Of circuits. Of ellipses.

__
__..=......._ | | _.......=..__
,-;,-' _..-----.:=._ | | _.=:.-----.._ `-,;-,
_,',' ,-' _____`-:. | | .:-'_____ `-, `,`,_
/ ,' ,' _.-''__...:..::. | | .::..:...__``-._ `, `, \
,' / ,' ,' _,' _,,,_-.. | | ..-_,,,_ `,_ `, `, \ `,
.' / / ,' / ,' `, | | ,' `, \ `, \ \ `.
| / / ,' .' ,' `,| |,' `, `. `, \ \ |
| .' / | | .' `| |' `. | | \ `. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | \ \ \ \ /| |\ / / / / | |
\ '. \ \ \ \ / | | \ / / / / .` /
\ `. \ \ `. `._ _.' | | `._ _.' .' / / .' /
\ \ `. `._ `.._ `''=-'''| |```-=``' _..' _.' .' / /
`. `. `._ `-..__i;;:=;;;' | | `;;;=:;;j__..-' _.' .' .'
`._`-._ `-.._____..=:i,' | | `,j:=.._____..-' _.-'_.'
`.._`--.....,-=;-' |__| `-;=-,.....--'_..'
`'------''

Those are magnetic field Lines of Force. And you will learn in electricity and magnetism that electricity is the duality of magnetism. That means, if magnetism goes around in a closed loop or ellipses, means that electricity, the electric current goes around in a closed loop or ellipse.

All of Space is a Voltage Field, and any object in Space, whether the Sun and Earth or a person on planet Earth or the water of a river or the trees of a forest, all of them are in a Voltage Field with lines of force of electric current.

Space itself is this Electric Voltage Field with Lines of Force. That is an important understanding and let me just repeat it.

Space itself is this Electric Voltage Field with Lines of Force.

Space itself is this Electric Voltage Field with Lines of Force.

Now let me explain what Gravity is, for it is very similar to Angular Momentum.

The best I have on that at this moment in time is to look at this ellipse angular momentum of Earth going around the Sun.

__
.-' `-.
.' `.
/ \
; ;
| S |
; ;
\ /
`. .'E
`- . _____ .-'

S is for Sun and E is for Earth. The Sun creates Lines of Force, a Voltage Field of Space around the Sun.

One of those lines of force is the above ellipse. That is one ellipse of many that the Sun creates, for it creates a ellipse that is the orbit of Mercury, another for the orbit of Venus, another for the orbit of Mars, etc.

So the Sun creates Space around the Sun as these ellipse tracks or pathways, or orbits.

But the Sun creates something else, more than the ellipse tracks. For the Sun creates a electric current that follows in those ellipse tracks.

So the Sun holds Earth in orbit by injecting this electric current of the Sun, injecting that electric current into Earth and this current pushes and pulls Earth in that Sun ellipse track.

The same can be said of the Moon, only we replace the Sun as the creator of a Voltage Field track with Earth, and it is Earth that is injecting electric current into the Moon and making the Moon follow a Voltage Field track that the Earth created.

That is the force of gravity in its most simple geometry picture. It is all about electricity and magnetism that creates a Space that is a Voltage Field track and with injected electric current, both pushes and pulls a body in that track.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 11, 2026, 8:03:07 PM (10 days ago) Jul 11

to Plutonium Atom Universe

A student sitting in any physics classroom across the world, whether it is Cambridge, Gottingen, Paris Academy, Caltech, Harvard are told the same pitiful nonsense garbage of how gravity of the Sun causes Earth to orbit the Sun.

They are told that the Earth long time ago had Linear Momentum and was moving in a straight line that would just simply escape the Sun and move into outer space. But then, Earth reached a point in Space where the Sun gravity of a pulling in force turned that Linear Momentum into increments of bending the track Earth was on, bending it so that Earth is captured and now orbits the Sun.

Students are never taught the real truth of gravity, that gravity is the weakest form of the Coulomb Electromagnetic force. And that the Sun creates a Magnetic Field around the Sun, as shown above of a stiff paper with iron filings and bar magnet below.

__
__..=......._ | | _.......=..__
,-; :=._ | | _.=: ;-,
_,' _____`-:. | | .:-'_____ `,_
/ _.-'' `-.::. | | .::.-' ``-._ \
,' ,' _,,,_`:. | | .:'_,,,_ `, `,
.' ,' ,' `,`.| |.',' `, `, `.
| ,' ,' `,| |,' `, `, |
| | .' || || `. | |

| E | V | M || || | | |

| | | || || | | |
| \ \ || || / / |
\ \ \ .'| |`. / / /
\ \ `.____.-' || || `-.____.' / /
\ `._ .'|| ||`. _.' /
`. `-.._______.-' | | `-._______..-' .'
`._ __.-' | | `-.__ _.'
`.._ _;-' |__| `-;_ _..'
`'------'' ``------`'

Of course that is poles, but imagine 1/2 of the picture above, with the labels E for Earth, V for Venus, and M for Mercury and each circuit is a Planet Orbit. Which reminds me to look up the Titius Bode Rule for planet orbit.

So, Gravity=== What is it?????

The Sun creates these Magnetic field tracks which are planetary orbits. Between a field track is too much interference that cancels itself out and no planets can be in between those tracks for long, no they move out of a interference band.

But, the Sun does two things. It creates the Orbit track by magnetism but it also shoots electric current into that track, a current that hits AFT of Earth and pushes Earth in that track, and the Electric Potential FORE of Earth pulls Earth in that same magnetic field track. We call this the gravity lock of Sun on Earth.

Now, this has to be the true model because we see the same physics played out on the planets themselves that have numerous satellites and some even have Rings. Jupiter satellites are a miniature creation of Sun to planet gravity. Rings of Saturn are a miniature creation of Sun to planet gravity. Notice all three models have a flat plane ecliptic of orbits--- of the magnetic field track, a track that has orbits and interference bands between orbit. And nothing permanent in the Space other than the plane. You will not see a planet or satellite or Ring material above or below the plane of orbit, at least for any long time for that is not stable to gravity.

This is the true Model of gravity and I need it to figure out how to push Earth + Moon away from the Sun to reach the Mars orbit, because our Sun has gone Red Giant and kill all life on Earth.

The BATTERY MODEL

---------------------------------

No-one in Old Physics or Old Chemistry was smart enough to realize, the Magnetic Monopole has to exist and be widespread throughout Nature. No-one before year 2016 said to the science community, that scientists are not trained in Logic to be worth their weight in salt when doing science, for they are logical fools.

When you think the 0.5MeV particle is the Atom's electron when in reality it is the magnetic monopole, of course you are going to come up with a nonsense idea of how batteries and rechargeable batteries work.

I do not know how many iterations I will go through before I accept one of these pictures.

So let me start off. And I start with when I first learned a Parallel Plate Capacitor in physics class around 1969 at University of Cincinnati.

Physics can be bare essentials and that is just perfect, rather than looking at Google images of chemistry batteries. No, in UC class this is what was presented as Capacitor in 1969.

_______________

Two parallel plates of metal, and we were taught from Halliday & Resnick, that is a capacitor that holds electricity.

So, how can it hold the 0.5MeV particles as electricity????

Here I use Occam's Razor principle. It says that the easiest solution is likely to be the correct solution.

What is the Easiest of all solutions that 2 plates of metal can hold a large number of 0.5MeV particles????

The Easiest solution is to say that Charge is direction of motion of a circuit. So that a monopole going counterclockwise is positive charge and a monopole going clockwise is a negative charge.

When a clockwise monopole circuit joins a counterclockwise monopole circuit they become neutral particles of 1 MeV. And they become more Particle than they were a circuit-wire, a wave. They no longer do Waving, so to speak but become static electricity.

And thus static electricity can be envisioned as these particles of 1 MeV filling up the entire Space between the 2 parallel plates of metal.

This aligns with the idea (Ampere law???) that electricity resides on the surface of metals.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 12, 2026, 6:59:51 AM (9 days ago) Jul 12

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Alright, I think I am going to have a very beautiful shortcut in proving my Model of how the battery works.

All I simply need do is get the statistics of volume of a battery, and how much each volume can hold to a maximum. If it is a direct linear relationship of current to volume and the spacing between parallel plates would be a proof I have the correct mechanism.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 12, 2026, 6:10:17 PM (9 days ago) Jul 12

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Yes, a direct proportionality of the Capacitance to permittivity of dielectric times Area of plates divided by separation distance, where C = perimittivity x Area / separation distance.

This means direct proportionality to volume.

Now I need to find out where the plus and minus magnetic monopoles store themselves. Do they store themselves on plates where all the plus are on one plate while all the minus on the other plate.

Something called "fringing" indicates this to be true.

If we say all the magnetic monopoles, where charge merely indicates the direction of motion of the electric circuit of clockwise or counterclockwise, where all the monopoles are stored on the metal plates, not on the dielectric, then that is Proof that like charge is Attract only, no Repel, and that repel in EM theory comes about only as a extreme instance of Pauli Exclusion Principle where the "repel" occurs only when squeezed too close together.

In other words, Gravity is EM as all Attract, and so is Coulomb force is EM as all Attract.

The only time in physics where there is Repel is when you violate Pauli Exclusion Principle.

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 13, 2026, 1:23:33 AM (8 days ago) Jul 13

to Plutonium Atom Universe

I said this was not easy, and meant it.

There is no repel force in EM theory but rather no same space occupancy called the Pauli Exclusion Principle, and of course a force of attraction. What seems like repel is actually the Pauli Exclusion Principle of Non - Occupancy of the Same Space. So the south to south poles of magnet or north to north pole is not repulsion but rather Non Occupancy of the Same Space.

In the AP Experiment of Magnets

----------------------------------------------------

We place magnets in a box and shake the box. Never is the case where magnets are repelling but always the end result is all the magnets are stuck together due to attraction.

It is extremely difficult for people without a Logical mind to understand that Pauli Exclusion is not the same as repel.

So I need to cover aspects of where it appears to be repulsion in EM theory, but expained otherwise. For no-one is going to explain how a battery works without explaining EM force of attraction with Pauli Exclusion and where ____no repel force exists____.

I shall correct the (1) electroscope (2) hair stand on end in static electricity (3) attract paper bits by glass rod rubbed on silk.

--- quoting Wikipedia on electroscope ---

Gold-leaf electroscope

Gold leaf electroscope showing electrostatic induction

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 13, 2026, 1:42:52 AM (8 days ago) Jul 13

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Correcting the falsehoods of Old Physics on electromagnetism for EM has a attraction force, a Pauli Exclusion Principle that does not allow for same Space Occupancy, and although it looks like a repulsion, is ___not a repel force___.

Most people never take Logic, nor would they understand it. Pauli Exclusion appears like repel but is far different.

--- quoting Wikipedia---

see Electrostatics.

Example of the effect of static electricity on a child's hairA simple experiment to demonstrate static electricity. A plastic scale rubbed on dry hair attracts paper bits.^[1]

Static electricity is an imbalance of electric chargeswithin or on the surface of a material. The charge remains until it can move away as an electric current or by electrical discharge. The word "static" is used to differentiate it from current electricity, where an electric charge flows through an electrical conductor.^[2]

A static electric charge can be created whenever two surfaces contact and/or slide against each other and then separate. The effects of static electricity are familiar to most people because they can feel, hear, and even see sparks if the excess charge is neutralized when brought close to an electrical conductor (for example, a path to ground), or a region with an excess charge of the opposite polarity (positive or negative). The familiar phenomenon of a static shock – more specifically, an electrostatic discharge – is caused by the neutralization of a charge.

Causes

Materials are made of atoms that are normally electrically neutral because they contain equal numbers of positive charges (protons in their nuclei) and negative charges (electrons in "shells" surrounding the nucleus). The phenomenon of static electricity requires a separation of positive and negative charges. When two materials are in contact, electrons may move from one material to the other, which leaves an excess of positive charge on one material, and an equal negative charge on the other. When the materials are separated, they retain this charge imbalance. It is also possible for ions to be transferred.

Contact-induced charge separation

Main article: Triboelectric effect

Styrofoam peanuts clinging to a cat's fur due to static electricity. This effect is also the cause of static cling in clothes.

--- end quoting Wikipedia---

AP writes:: I wonder if these concepts of Triboelectric effect is really just some facet of the Pauli Exclusion Principle.

When the true electron of Atoms is the muon stuck inside a proton torus and the 0.5MeV particle is the magnetic monopole the unit of electricity, then we need a full scale overhaul of both physics and chemistry on their ideas of electricity and magnetism.

And one idea of the repel force in EM theory needs especial attention for overhaul.

AP, King of Science

P.S. I hate that picture of the styrofoam, for California banned styrofoam as a soil pollutant and damaging the environment. There is no use that I can see for styrofoam and it should be banned nationwide.

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 13, 2026, 6:04:16 AM (8 days ago) Jul 13

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Alright, so, to understand how a Battery works, we first have to fix the crazy ideas in Old Physics, especially its "charge".

The greatest single most stupid concept holding back Physics in Electromagnetism is this crank crackpot concept called "charge".

Let us look at what physicists define "charge" first.

pp

--- quoting a Google Search for glass rod or comb attracting bits of paper---

electricity - Why does the comb attract the pieces of papers if they're neutral? - Physics Stack Exchange

Physics Stack Exchange

Electric Charges | CK-12 Foundation

CK12-Foundation

Licensable

Hand Holds Comb and Small Pieces of Paper. Equipment, Prepared To Do Experiment about Static Electricity Stock Photo - Image of demonstration, childhood: 312348358

Dreamstime.com

Video

How to Attract Paper to a Comb using Static Electricity - Simple Science Experiment

YouTube

Licensable

Static electricity, comb attracting paper, illustration - Stock Image - C050/8722 - Science Photo Library

Science Photo Library

56.03 -- Attract paper bits with charged rod

UCSB Physics

Licensable

static electricity on comb attracts pieces of paper Stock Photo - Alamy

Alamy

Video

Attraction of paper pieces by charged plastic scale

YouTube

173 Magnetic Comb Royalty-Free Images, Stock Photos & Pictures | Shutterstock

Shutterstock

Why does a charged glass rod attract a piece of paper ?

Allen

Static Comb Experiment. Have you ever rubbed a balloon on your… | by Bayer US | The Beaker Life | Medium

Medium

Video

comb picking up papers due to static electricity

YouTube

ppp

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 13, 2026, 7:37:25 PM (8 days ago) Jul 13

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Feynman in "Feynman Lectures on Physics", 1963, Volume 1, page 4-7 talks about the Conservation of Charge-- "The first of the three is the conservation of charge, and that merely means that you count how many positive, minus how many negative electrical charges you have, and the number is never changed."

AP writes:: Authors sometimes introduce something before they define that something. So let us see if Feynman defines "charge" some place later on. If not, then Feynman is doing sloppy physics.

On page 12-7 of "Feynman Lectures on Physics" writes--- "We shall first discuss electrical force. Objects carry electrical charges which consist simply of electrons or protons. If any two bodies are electrically charged, there is an electrical force between them, and if the magnitudes of the charges are q_1 and q_2, respectively, the force varies inversely as the square of the distance between the charges, or F = (constant) q_1q_2/ r^2. "

AP writes:: Apparently Feynman thought the proton as 938MeV and electron has 0.5MeV carries something called a "charge". Feynman was a Mathematical Physicist but not a Logical Physicist. He accepted Gauss law and Maxwell Equations saying No Magnetic Monopole exists. That is the heart of Feynman's failure on "charge". The 0.5MeV particle is not the Atom's electron but rather the Magnetic Monopole, the unit of electricity.

Let us see what my college textbook Halliday and Resnick define "charge". "Fundamentals of Physics" 3rd edition 1988, page 535-- "The electrical neutrality of most objects in our visible and tangible world conceals the fact that such objects contain enormous amounts of positive and negative electric charge that largely cancel each other in their external effects. Only when this nice electrical balance is slightly disturbed does nature reveal to us the effects of uncompensated positive or negative charge. When we say that a body is "charged" we mean that it has a slight charge imbalance.

Charged bodies exert forces on each other. "

AP writes:: You see why AP insists that all graduates in college and university are required to have at least 2 years of College Logic be required courses. Because, if Halliday and Resnick had taken 2 years of College Logic, they probably would have recognized that they have ---- no definition of what is "charge". All they have is some ramblings of what "charge" is.

How does AP define "charge"??? Simple. The Atom's proton is 840 MeV and shaped in a torus geometry as a coil. Inside the proton torus is the Atom's electron as a muon of 105MeV that acts as a bar magnet thrusting through the proton torus in the Faraday law-structure producing new electricity. The 0.5MeV particle is the Magnetic Monopole, the "charge" in physics and is a Electromagnetic Spectrum wave between X-rays and Gamma-rays. Charge is the unit of electricity and is this magnetic monopole particle. The Gauss law in Maxwell's Equation are wrong and are false for the 0.5MeV particle is a magnetic monopole and is ==== to charge in physics.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 13, 2026, 10:50:10 PM (8 days ago) Jul 13

to Plutonium Atom Universe

So, in the history of Physics, it is easy to classify them. Whether they were a mathematical physicist or not, or whether they were a logical physicist or not.

Newton was both a Logical and Mathematical Physicist. You had to be to start physics as a systematic science with first principles.

Newton was a great physicist for he was a Logical Math Physicist.

Faraday was a great physicist for he was a Logical Physicist, but not mathematical. The notes he kept of his experiments had no math at all.

Maxwell was a lesser physicist for he was a Mathematical Physicist, but not a Logical one. Maxwell failed to realize his Equations were Asymmetrical when Gauss's law calls for No Magnetic Monopoles. Faraday will be remembered long after Maxwell is forgotten.

Feynman was a Mathematical Physicist, lacking the ability to think logically. One of his greatest accomplishments was writing the Lectures on Physics, for which all future Kings of Science must perform. But AP has it easy in this regard, for all of AP's work can be seen on the Internet, and seen for free.

But the shortcomings of Feynman are clear to see--- he cannot even well define what the hell is "charge".

And, if Feynman had had a Logical Mind, his true confession that the Atomic Theory in the opening pages of this Lectures on Physics, that Dr. Feynman with a logical mind would have discovered the Plutonium Atom Totality theory long before AP discovered it in 1990.

John Bell, though possessed both a logical and mathematical mind. Bell was a Logical Math Physicists. For his Bell Inequality requires math skill. And his thought provoking Superdeterminism requires exquisite Logical Mind. John Bell died just a few months before AP discovered the Plutonium Atom Totality which would give meaning to Bell's Superdeterminism.

The theme of this story is clear to see---- Physics and all the other sciences--- going forward---- requires professors who are skilled not just in math, but also know a thing or two about LOGIC.

Everyone in science without logic skill, is more likely to end up being --- wrong in what they offer.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 14, 2026, 5:01:26 AM (7 days ago) Jul 14

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Let me see how good, or, how poor of a job that my own High School physics textbook did on the definition of "charge".

PSSC, PHYSICS, 3rd edition (mine was 2nd edition), 1971, Haber-Schaim, Cross, Dodge, Walter, page 398 says

"Repeat this experiment with two rods of plastic rubbed with a piece of fur. These two rods repel as the two glass rods did (Fig. 18-1).

Finally rub a glass rod with silk and a plastic rod with fur. Place one rod in the stirrup and bring the other near it. We now find that these rods attract each other.

We can perform similar experiments with a number of other materials. Objects of the same material which have been "electrified" by the same procedure always repel. Different electrified objects may either attract or repel.

We find that the electrified objects fall into two groups. Only two "electric states" exist, one similar to that of the glass rod and the one similar to that of the plastic rod of the previous example. Following the common usage, which dates back to Benjamin Franklin, we shall say that the glass rod and all other electrified objects which behave like it are positively charged. Similarly we shall say that the plastic rod and all other electrified objects which behave like it are negatively charged."

AP writes:: Sadly it is a poor definition of charge. It talks more about plastic rubbed with fur and glass rubbed with silk then it tells us what charge is. Did PSSC do any better than Feynman or Halliday & Resnick?? Perhaps but all failed to define "what is charge".

AP

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 14, 2026, 5:51:22 PM (7 days ago) Jul 14

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Physics: Its Methods and Meanings, Taffel, 5th ed, 1986

I sort of wish that in 1967-8 at Wyoming High School in Cincinnati Ohio had used Taffel's book instead of PSSC, but Taffel's book came out in 1986. Perhaps Taffel's 1st edition was around in 1967???? A book far more clear in thought than ever was PSSC.

--- quoting Taffel on page 392---

20-1 Amber and Electricity

As early as 600 B.C., it was known that amber that has been rubbed by cloth attracts small bits of material of all kinds. Amber's ability to attract resembles that of the natural magnet, known as lodestone. However, the attraction of lodestone and magnets is limited mainly to objects made of iron, whereas amber which has been rubbed with cloth attracts all substances.

It was not until the sixteenth century that a methodical study of this curious property of amber was made by William Gilbert... He found that many other substances act like amber in acquiring the ability to attract light objects after they have been rubbed against other substances. Gilbert called such substances "electrics," which comes from the Greek word electron, meaning amber.

Subsequently, it was shown that every body acquires the ability to attract small bits of matter after it has been rubbed by another body. Bodies showing this attracting property are said to have an electric charge or to be electrified. Since the electric charges on electrified bodies are usually at rest, they are referred to as stationary or static electricity. In the familiar household electric circuits, electric charges aer in motion. Streams of moving charges are known as electric currents.

20-2 Like Charges Repel; Unlike Charges Attract

A typical charged body is made by rubbing a rod of hard rubber with fur. The charge in the rubber rod is revealed by the fact that it attracts small uncharged pieces of wood, metal, paper, and other materials. In general, an electrically charged body attracts all objects that are uncharged. However, it may either attract or repel other charged bodies.

Bodies with like charges repel each other: those with unlike charges attract each other.

--- end quoting Taffel---

AP writes:: So this is the best explanation of "charge" I have seen so far, but it does not define "charge". To define charge you need to say what charge itself is, not describing how it behaves.

AP defines Charge = The magnetic monopole of 0.5MeV which can come in either the positron or the antipositron, the positive and the negative 0.5MeV. As a wire-wave it is between X-rays and Gamma rays. As a particle it is either the positron or antipositron (Old Physics stupidly called it the electron).

When defining "charge" you need to tell what it is, not just describe its behavior.

Let me see if Isaac Asimov in his "The History of Physics" does a better job.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 14, 2026, 10:35:50 PM (7 days ago) Jul 14

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Isaac Asimov "The History of Physics", 1966, page 397 says this about charge.

--- quoting Asimov---

Electric Charge

Gilbert, who originated the earth-magnet idea, also studied the attractive forces produced by rubbing amber. He pivoted a light metal arrow so delicately that it would turn under the application of a tiny force. He could, in that way, detect very weak attractive forces and proceeded to find substances other than amber which, on rubbing, would produce such forces. Beginning in 1570, he found that a number of gems such as diamond, sapphire, amethyst, opal, carbuncle, jet, and even ordinary rock crystal produced such attractive forces when rubbed. He called these substances "electrics." A substance showing such an attractive force was said to be electrified or to have gained an electric charge.

A number of substances, on the other hand, including the metals in particular, could not be electrified and hence were "non-electric."

Eventually, electricity came to be considered a fluid. When a substance like amber was electrified, it was considered to have gained electric fluid which then remained there stationary. Such a charge was called static electricity, from a Latin word meaning "to be stationary," and the study of the properties of electricity under such conditions is called electrostatics.

Before electric forces could be studied easily, the fluid had to be concentrated in sizable quantities-- in greater quantity than could be squeezed into small bits of precious and semiprecious materials. Some "electric" hat was cheap and available in sizable quantities had to be found.

In the 1660's, the German physicist Otto von Guericke (1602-1686) found such a material in sulfur. He prepared a sphere of sulfur, larger than a man's head, arranged so that it could be turned by a crank. A hand placed on it as it turned gradually electrified it to a hitherto unprecedented extent. Guericke had constructed the first electrical friction machine.

AP writes:: So yes, in past times they also thought "heat" was a fluid calling it "phlogiston". But once heat was recognized as EM spectrum of infrared radiation, then phlogiston was thrown out of physics as a fake. Also, charge as a fluid was seen as fake but no-one could see, like phlogiston, that it also needed to be thrown out completely as fake and charge being EM spectrum radiation, somewhere between X-rays and Gamma rays. Is it because physics professors in training were not schooled in Logic to think straight, clear and correctly???? I recommend all scientists before getting a degree in science have 2 years of college Logic training.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 15, 2026, 1:09:55 AM (6 days ago) Jul 15

to Plutonium Atom Universe

One of Physics Greatest Experiments on Charge

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

To show that charge is a fake concept of physics.

We saw from Feynman that charge is -1 unit for the 0.5MeV particle, and +1 unit for the proton and +1 unit for the positron. But we are never told in Old Physics--- what the hell is charge in terms of a particle itself. Old Physics has "charge" as a mystery. Part of the blame for this absence of science in Electromagnetism is Gauss's law saying ___No Magnetic Monopoles___ adopted by Maxwell in his Equations of 1860.

If Maxwell had looked at his equations from a Logic standpoint and said--- ho hum, I have asymmetry in Gauss law and throw out Gauss law. Then, Maxwell, being a Logical physicist by throwing out Gauss law, would have to replace it by saying ___ the magnetic monopole exists____ and is the +1 charge and the -1 charge. Of course the 0.5MeV particle will be discovered in 1897 long after 1860's.

If the 0.5 MeV particle is the magnetic monopole that comes in two types +1 and -1, then what is the electron of Atoms??? Here again, physics would have to wait till 1936 for the Muon to be discovered by Anderson and Neddermeyer.

So what is this Great Experiment about Charge???? It is an experiment I spoke of decades back. If AP is correct, with the true electron of Atoms being the Muon stuck inside proton toruses, Gold atom is one big proton joined together of 79 protons and is 79 x 840 rings of one large single proton torus, while hydrogen is the smallest proton torus of 1 x 840 rings for the true proton is 840 MeV while muon is 105MeV and magnetic monopoles (all charges) are a mere 0.5 MeV.

In New Physics--- the existence of subatomic particles is an existence that requires some task or job in the EM law structures. The proton exists as the coil in Faraday law-structure. The Muon exists as the bar magnet in Faraday law-structure. The magnetic monopole of 0.5 MeV whether +1 clockwise or -1 counterclockwise exists much the same way that heat exists as infrared radiation and the electric current unit is the magnetic monopole, somewhere between X rays and Gamma rays in the Spectrum.

Old Physics is a physics where particles exist that have no job, no task, no function but just sit around on a beach lazily drinking cold cool lemonade. New Physics is where every particle has a job, function, task to perform in the law structure of Electromagnetism.

So, the Great Experiment--- If AP is correct, that the Muon is the true electron of Atoms and stuck inside proton toruses, then its job is to be a bar magnet in Faraday's Law-structure of the muon thrusting through the proton torus producing new electricity which is the 0.5MeV particle. Now it produces new EM radiation all the way from 1 eV up to 0.5MeV as the Muon thrusts at almost the speed of light around inside the proton torus.

And once the proton+ muon produce this electricity it is stored in Neutrons which surround the proton torus and where the electricity that is not already 0.5 MeV monopoles, has the opportunity of collecting together diverse amounts of eV energy to assemble into a 0.5MeV particle. Neutrons, in New Physics grow from 1 eV into becoming 0.5 MeV.

In Old Physics, those fools had particles with no function, no job, no task, such as the primitive insane notion of 0.5MeV particles floating around outside some dense nucleus of protons and neutrons as balls that also had no job, no function, no task. All of Old Physics was tiny balls with no jobs, almost the same as tiny marbles that composed the brain of Old Physicists.

Great Experiment

---------------------------

If AP is correct, then you can remove all the 0.5 MeV particles of any atom leaving behind just a single proton torus surrounded by neutrons as capacitors. In other words, iron atomic number is 26. Given a single iron atom, if AP is correct you can remove all 26 of the 0.5MeV particles, plus, 1 or 2 more. This is because the electrons of iron are the 26 muons inside the proton torus of iron.

If Old Physics of Feynman and all those physics professors who preach Feynman are correct, you cannot remove more 0.5 MeV particles than the Atomic number of the atoms you are working with. You can remove 26 of the 0.5MeV particles of any given iron atom but not more than 26.

In this Great Experiment, half of it has already been done. As far as I know of this writing, all atoms via experiment have been completely IONIZED. Ionized to where only protons and neutrons exist, yet the atom that is completely ionized behaves almost the same as when it was not ionized at all. This should have incited in the brains of some physicists the the 0.5MeV particle is NOT the electron atoms. Plus the fact that it makes no Logical sense, that you can remove all the electrons of Iron and still the atom is iron.

What the Great Experiment exposes, is that we do not stop at removing 26 of the 0.5MeV particle from a single iron atom, but we continue further and remove 1 more of the 0.5MeV particle from that same single iron atom.

I have a feeling in my bones, that this Great Experiment was already done and the surprising result of having 27, perhaps 28 of the 0.5MeV particle had beeen removed from a single iron atom. Or I could be completely wrong in that such a experiment requires Exquisite precision and cannot be a statistical error.

Now I looked at another textbook in physics titled "QUANTA: A Handbook of Concepts" 2nd edition, Atkins, 1991, page 66 talks about the concept of "Charge" and "charge correlation" and "configuration interaction". I bring this up because quantum mechanics experiments probably already have proven that from a single iron atom, that 27, or 28 of the 0.5MeV particle has already been observed and that they cover this up with this charge-correlation to make sense of it. Whereas I make sense of it by saying--- the Iron Atom can yield 27 or even 28 of the 0.5MeV particle because they are --- NOT Electrons, but magnetic monopoles produced by the Proton torus and muons inside.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 15, 2026, 4:39:17 AM (6 days ago) Jul 15

to Plutonium Atom Universe

There is a second great experiment which is already in

--------------------------------------------------------

A second great experiment proving that the 0.5MeV particle are NOT electrons but magnetic monopoles.

It involves the idea that Beta Decay is not the decay of 0.5MeV particles but is the emission of magnetic monopoles because the proton +muons produce the monopoles in the Faraday law-structure.

So that Pu238 in RTGs commonly found in Spacecraft, sometimes emit more Beta particles than once thought.

In this case, we look for Anomalies in Spacecraft, and I found two of them easily tonight. Both Pioneer spacecraft have a huge anomaly and the Galileo flyby anomaly.

So that when Pu238 produces more Beta particles than expected, it causes the acceleration.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 15, 2026, 7:59:52 PM (6 days ago) Jul 15

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Looks like I am going to further research my 237th book of science.

One) proving that the 0.5MeV particle is the Dirac Magnetic Monopole and not the electron of Atoms.

Two) proving that the Proton is 840 MeV with Muon inside thrusting through proton torus producing new electricity.

--- quoting from my 237th book of science--

Element-isotope that emits out the most Beta particles per second and thus proving that they are not electrons// physics research

by Archimedes Plutonium

This is AP's 237th---

8) Getting the data to determine world's largest Beta emitter, is it Pm-147 or Cu-66?

Alright I am just not getting the data I want. Try as I may in a Google search with "best beta emitter" or "largest beta emitter". Maybe there is a scientific term which is not cognizant to me at the moment, instead of best or large. What I want is the isotope in which we turn it into a closed loop and connect a measuring instrument, say Galvanometer, and with no other source of electricity, that the Beta decay provides all the electricity measured.

There is this website from Univ. Wisconsin. It suggests Cu-66, Pr-145, Y-90, P-32, Y-91 are contenders for what I am looking for-- take a closed loop of such a emitter and see which provides the most electricity by its sheer beta decay. Funny how Promethium Pm-147 is not showing high in maximum energy, and yet it was used to make heart pacemaker batteries. Maybe the categories in the Uni Wisconsin table are not applicable to what I want as the best beta emitter. Maybe the fact that pacemakers were made of Pm-147 is all the conclusive evidence necessary for it to be the best beta emitter.

--- quoting Univ Wisconsin website on Beta emitters ---
Pure Beta Emitters
This is a list of pure beta emitters. These are of interest to those making radioisotope power sources.

These are sorted by half-life.

You can download the data in spreadsheet form here. This will let you sort by other criteria.

There are a handful of isotopes which I would call "almost-pure" beta emitters. These have a gamma abundance of less than 2%. They include As-77, Br-83, La-141, and Cm-249. All have half-lives of less than two days.

One interesting isotope is Ra-228. The half-life is 5.8 years. It has two beta pathways. One has a maximum energy of 14.9 keV and the other is 39.2 keV. There are two gamma pathways, both with energy less than 13.5 keV. The total abundance of the gammas is 5.7%.

All isotopes listed below decay to a stable isotope, unless noted otherwise in the comment column.

isotope half-life (years) max energy (keV) avg energy (keV) abundance comments
cu-66 9.74E-6 2640 1111 1
pb-209 0.00038 644.4 197.5 1
pr-145 0.000685 1805 683 0.95 has many beta decay pathways - only one is shown here
te-127 0.00107 276 78.2 0.012 has multiple beta decay pathways
te-127 0.00107 694 224.7 0.988 has multiple beta decay pathways
sn-121 0.0030 388.9 115.2 1
ni-66 0.0063 227 65 1 decays to Cu-66, a pure beta emitter with a 29 s half-life
y-90 0.007 2281.4 933.7 1
bi- 210 0.014 1161.5 389 1 decays to Po-210, an alpha emitter with a 138 d half-life; also has a small alpha decay channel with an abundance of 0.00013%
er-169 0.0258 342.5 98.1 0.45 has multiple beta decay pathways
er-169 0.0258 350.9 100.8 0.55 has multiple beta decay pathways
pr-143 0.037 934.5 315.3 1
p-32 0.039 1710.3 694.9 1
p-33 0.069 248.5 76.4 1
sr-89 0.138 1492 583.3 1
y-91 0.160 340.9 100.8 0.003 has multiple beta decay pathways
y-91 0.160 1545.6 604.9 0.997 has multiple beta decay pathways
w-188 0.190 58 14.9 0.008 has multiple beta decay pathways, decays to Re-188, a beta/gamma emitter with a 17 h half-life
w-188 0.190 285 79.9 0.002 has multiple beta decay pathways, decays to Re-188, a beta/gamma emitter with a 17 h half-life
w-188 0.190 349 99.7 0.99 has multiple beta decay pathways, decays to Re-188, a beta/gamma emitter with a 17 h half-life
s-35 0.240 166.8 48.6 1
sn-123 0.354 314 90.5 0.006 has multiple beta decay pathways
sn-123 0.354 1403 525.5 0.994 has multiple beta decay pathways
ca-45 0.445 256.8 77.2 1
bk-249 0.877 125.7 32.4 1 decays to Cf-249, an alpha/gamma emitter with a 351 y half-life
ru-106 1.0 39.4 10 1 decays to Rh-106, a pure beta emitter with a 30 s half-life and a peak energy of 3.5 MeV
tm-171 1.9 29.7 7.5 0.02 has multiple beta decay pathways
tm-171 1.9 96.4 25.1 0.98 has multiple beta decay pathways
pm-147 2.6 224.6 62 1 decays to Sm-147, an alpha emitter with a very long half-life
kr-85 10.8 173.4 47.65 0.004 has multiple beta decay pathways
kr-85 10.8 687.4 251.6 0.996 has multiple beta decay pathways
h-3 12.3 18.6 5.7 1
cd-113m 14.1 580 185.4 1 also has a small isomeric transition channel with an abundance of 0.14% and a decay energy of 264 keV
pu-241 14.4 20.8 5.2 1 decays to Am-241, an alpha/gamma emitter with a 432 y half-life
sr-90 28.8 546.2 195.8 1 decays to Y-90, a beta emitter with a 2.7 d half life
ar-42 32.9 600 233 1 decays to K-42, a beta/gamma emitter with a 12.4 h half-life
sm-151 90.1 54.8 13.96 0.009 has multiple beta decay pathways
sm-151 90.1 76.3 19.68 0.991 has multiple beta decay pathways
ni-63 100.2 66.9 17.4 1
si-32 172.1 225 68.8 1 decays to P-32, a pure beta emitter with a 14 d half-life
ar-39 269.2 565 218.8 1
c-14 5734 156.5 49.5 1
tc-99 2.1E+05 293.5 84.6 1
se-79 6.5E+05 150.7 55.8 1
be-10 1.5E+06 556.2 202.6 1
cs-135 2.3E+06 205 56.3 1
pd-107 6.5E+06 33 9.3 1
re-187 4.4E+10 2.6 0.7 1
in-115 4.4E+14 497 152 1
cd-113 9.3E+15 316 93.3 1
References
Table of Nuclides at KAERI
The Risk Assessment Information System at ORNL
"Pocket Guide for Radiological Management," published by Perma-Fix Environmental Services
--- end quoting Univ Wisconsin website on Beta emitters ---

Betavoltaics is what I am looking for and was based on Promethium in 1970s. Now it is based on tritium.

The Univ Wisconsin chart has 61-Promethium-147 at average kinetic energy 62keV listing Cu-66 as highest at 1111keV.

What I like to know is what isotopes, when crafted into a closed loop wire of that isotope, then attach a measuring instrument, what isotope supplies the most electricity per time, say short time or long time.

Maybe this work and research has never been done due to health risks.

This is important and new work, because the 0.5MeV particle is not the Atom's electron, but is the Dirac magnetic monopole and responsible for electricity. The true electron of atoms is stuck inside proton toruses doing the Faraday law with the proton toruses and producing these magnetic monopoles.

It is possible that some of these metals of Beta decay are perpetual motion producing electricity. What I mean by that is the muon plus proton toruses create electricity as long as the muon keeps thrusting through the proton torus.

Through my lifetime of observation-- batteries last longer than expected. Batteries deliver more energy than expected, and all because the atoms themselves create magnetic monopoles that is electricity.

So which of these two is the better Betavoltaic device-- pure Cu-66 or Pm-147??

The majority of this book is about BetaVoltaic batteries, for the 0.5MeV particle is not the Atom's electron, but is the Dirac magnetic monopole produced inside of proton toruses inside atoms with the muon as real true electron thrusting through the proton torus in the Faraday law and creating these 0.5MeV particles that is electricity.

If the 0.5MeV particle were really the electron, then those atoms in the BetaVoltaic batteries would soon have no electrons leaving them as nothing more than pure protons and neutrons, a complete ionization.

And the reason that batteries work so well the world over, is because the atoms comprising those batteries actually create new and more of these 0.5MeV magnetic monopoles in the Faraday law.

The atomic batteries in Voyager 1 and 2 surprised everyone on how well they work-- and although not BetaVoltaic but a thermal atomic batteries, still the principle is the same that the newly created magnetic monopoles gave those batteries longer life than expected.

9) Proposed research experiment to determine best Beta emitter.

So from this Univ.Wisconsin list I am going to propose a deep and thorough research investigation take place.

Where you take each of these metal isotopes, as pure as possible and make a molar count of those atoms and fabricate it into a closed loop wire, of course run it through a semiconductor junction for a current and attach a Galvanometer.

I want to know which of these below metals produces the best steady stream of electricity. I would hazard to guess Pm-147 but I maybe fooled by Cu-66 as being better??

Once we can accurately measure the quantity of those atoms, the flow of electricity, we can use the numbers to prove that the 0.5MeV particle is Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms. For the Atom's electron is the muon stuck inside 840MeV proton toruses doing the Faraday law and creating the 0.5MeV particle.

Old Physics would say that Pm-147 has become complete ionization of its electrons. New Physics would say those are magnetic monopoles not the atom's electrons.

Alright, I cannot find from known data and research which of these two isotopes are the world's greatest Beta emitters Cu-66 or Pm-147. Nor can I find enough data to prove my message of this book. That the true electron of Atoms is the muon stuck inside a proton torus or toruses doing the Faraday law with the proton torus and Creating the magnetic monopoles of 0.5MeV. Creating electricity by the muon plus proton and this is why Batteries work far better than ever expected-- because the material the battery is made of produces electricity. And to prove that, all I need to show is that a closed loop circuit of Pm-147 or Cu-66 with semiconductor junction yields more electricity than what exists as Old Physics 0.5MeV as the mistaken electron.

In other words, in this experiment we prove that in Old Physics, the Pm-147 is reduced of all of its 0.5MeV particles and so they would have no electron atoms at all. And-- even worse-- 0.5MeV particles from out of nowhere to fraudulently cover up Old Physics take on BetaVoltaics.

Since I cannot find the data or it is not accessible on the Internet, I will make up a Guidance-Trial-Experiment for researchers to follow as a guide and then reveal the numbers data.

Guide Experiment

Alright, so using both Pm-147 such as in the old time pacemakers battery. And using the Cu-66.

So we craft a battery from each, we have the BetaVoltaic battery of Pm-147 and Cu-66.

We know precise Molar quantity of Pm-147 and Cu-66.

We know Pm has 61 Dirac magnetic monopoles of 0.5MeV, what Old Physics calls the electron of atoms while copper Cu-66 has 29.

We have instruments to measure the electricity flow.

What we ultimately want to measure is the idea that Pm-147 and Cu-66 are stripped of their entire sets of 0.5MeV particles 61 for Pm and 29 for Copper, stripped from each atom to leaving it a proton-neutron ionized particle.

We find from those measurements that the flow of electricity for Pm-147 means the 0.5MeV particle flow rate to make electricity exceeds the 61 count of each atom of Pm-147. In other words, the Pm in this experiment using Old Physics ideas, has turned the Pm into a stripped of all its 0.5MeV particles that it would be a complete ionized Pm of only protons of 938MeV with neutrons. Same situation with Cu-66, stripped of all 0.5MeV particles and copper ionization to nothing but protons and neutrons.

Whereas New Physics realizes the true electron of atoms was never the 0.5MeV particle = Dirac's magnetic monopole in the first place, and the atoms of Pm or copper in this experiment were still full Pm and copper atoms with the muon as electron stuck inside proton toruses, creating and producing more electricity of 0.5MeV particles.

Of course this experiment poses health risks to the researchers and engineers alike.

10) Tritium BetaVoltaics summarizes the proof that 0.5MeV particles are not the Atom's electrons.

I certainly would like to know which of the isotopes is the worlds best, and by best, I mean a steady flow of electricity of a large amount for the longest time. I believe still that it is Promethium element 61 of its isotope 147. I say this only because it was selected for use in making heart pacemakers. But science needs to know if Pm is the best, for it may well be Cu-66, or Y-90, or Pr-145, or P-32, or Y-91 or something else entirely.

But as for the proof that the 0.5MeV particle is not the Atom's electron we need go no further than hydrogen with its one solo 0.5MeV particle and its ability to form a BetaVoltaic battery. Simply get rid of its one 0.5MeV particle and it is fully ionized down to its 2 neutrons and 1 proton.

So in an experiment we get a accurate count, as accurate as possible as to how many atoms of tritium we are experimenting on.

We run this tritium BetaVoltaic battery and find that it works far beyond the count of these 0.5MeV particles should have all been gone, used up in the battery.

But instead, we end up with even far more of these 0.5MeV particles formed into electricity than the theory of Old Physics can account for. In other words, the atoms of tritium were manufacturing more 0.5MeV particles while conducting the experiment, proving the true electron of atoms is the muon stuck inside a proton torus doing the Faraday law and producing those many extras of 0.5MeV particles.

11) Both BetaVoltaics and Radioactive Thermal Generators RTG require Semiconductor devices.

In writing this book I could not help but notice that both Beta emitter batteries and the thermal alpha particle batteries such as 238Pu, RTG need a semiconductor device to convert the Beta particles to electricity or convert the thermal energy to electricity. And I learned something which I had missed in schooling-- the Seebeck Effect. So these new learnings by me is ample cause to write another book on physics focused on the Seebeck Effect. For here, I believe I can unify all of Thermodynamics to Electromagnetism from the Seebeck Effect.

AP could not help but notice a Faraday law of Magnetic Dipoles in the RTG-- heat energy converted to electricity by the RTG. Heat energy is actually magnetic dipoles such as infrared radiation and when passed through a semiconductor junction to turn the dipoles into electricity monopoles.

Almost the same thing can be said of BetaVoltaics using a semiconductor bridge junction to make electricity.

I believe these two types of batteries allows AP to convert all of Thermodynamic theory into that of Electromagnetic theory. Before, I could only approach the 2nd law of thermodynamics as saying-- it obeys the "right hand rule" of EM theory. Now if all goes well, I believe I can convert all of thermodynamics into EM theory.

This is a perfect example of what I mean that writing one book causes new future books to write spring forth.

--- end quoting my 237th book ---

ppp

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 16, 2026, 5:43:30 AM (5 days ago) Jul 16

to Plutonium Atom Universe

What I am doing here is recounting all the important characteristics of the 0.5MeV particle in order to make the true valid model of how a Battery works.

One of those important characteristics is the covalent bond of chemistry, when they thought the 0.5MeV particle was the electron of atoms, which it is not, for they are magnetic monopoles.

In covalent bonding we can see a +0.5 bond with a -0.5 to form a neutral 1 MeV particle or wire-wave.

So that I can picture in my mind a battery that is fully recharged is 1 MeV particles.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 16, 2026, 8:17:57 PM (5 days ago) Jul 16

to Plutonium Atom Universe

I building up the concepts to make a Battery Model.

So how many Magnetic Monopoles 0.5MeV particle can fit inside a AAA or AA or car battery???

According to Wikipedia--- Observation of a single (monopole) in a Penning trap suggests the upper limit of the particle's radius to be 10^-22 m. The upper bound of the (monopole) radius of 10^-18 m can be derived using the uncertainty relation in energy.

Checking on what the radius of the true Electron of Atoms--- the muon is. Physics World says the proton radius is 0.8406 femtometers (10^-15 m) while muons are more tightly bound.

This is much in agreement with the idea that muons are inside proton torus and acting as bar magnet in the Faraday law-structure.

So I am going to use both figures of 10^-18 and 10^-22 to see how many Magnetic Monopoles can fill up a AAA battery that gives its performance of issuing electric current.

P.S. a note of importance. The muon decays into a magnetic monopole and two high energy neutrinos, which to me is the same as saying two high energy Gamma Rays. So in New Physics, we begin to ask the question, that Neutrinos seem to be outside the picture of the EM Spectrum when neutrinos should be a part of that picture. In other words, neutrinos are the same as Gamma rays or other EM Spectrum.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 16, 2026, 9:48:52 PM (5 days ago) Jul 16

to Plutonium Atom Universe

So I am preparing myself to give the true accurate model of how a battery holds the 0.5MeV Magnetic Monopoles and then releases them in a electric current flow. First I need to assemble many known facts.

From the Internet is a claim that the AAA battery has this--

A standard AAA alkaline battery holds roughly 1.2 to 1.5 \(\times \) 10\({}^{22}\) usable electrons.This number comes from its electrical capacity, calculated as follows:Charge in Coulombs: A typical AAA battery has a capacity of roughly 850–1,000 mAh (about 3,600 coulombs).Electron Charge: A single electron carries a charge of approximately 1.602 \(\times \) 10\({}^{-19}\) coulombs.The Math: Dividing the total battery charge by the charge of a single electron (\(\frac{3,600\text{\ C}}{1.602\times 10^{-19}\text{\ C}}\)) gives the total number of usable electrons.Note: In terms of total physical mass, the battery is completely electrically neutral, meaning it contains an equal number of electrons and protons across all of its chemical components.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 16, 2026, 9:55:09 PM (5 days ago) Jul 16

to Plutonium Atom Universe

What the Internet has for the AA battery to see it aligns with AAA amount.

--- quoting Internet---

A typical AA alkaline battery contains roughly \(2.25 \times 10^{22}\) usable electrons (about 3,600 coulombs) available for a circuit. However, the battery itself remains electrically neutral because it houses the exact same amount of protons overall; these electrons are simply transferred from its zinc negative electrode to the positive electrode during use

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 17, 2026, 5:28:56 AM (4 days ago) Jul 17

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Yes, the number 10^22 keeps coming up for the AAA battery, and surprised to find that the number 10^22 also comes up for the amount of zinc atoms in the battery.

So, I stop for a moment and think to myself, I have enough information and data to realize that the storage of Magnetic Monopoles, what Old Physics and Old Chemistry called the electrons of Atoms the 0.5MeV particle cannot be a storage of anything connected to bonding in chemistry such as covalent or ionic, not even metallic.

The storage of Magnetic Monopoles as the unit of electricity, must be the storage of building a Neutron as parallel plate capacitor.

I say this because of one Crucial Overriding Important Detail--- the Existence of Short Circuit.

Short Circuit is what is going to solve this problem----- How the Battery Works.

So when you have no short circuit the flow of electric current is quite steady, and how can you get a steady flow?? It is something the same as radioactive decay is steady slow flow like Beta Decay. We can say, safely, that Beta Decay is a electric battery without the battery.

But a Short Circuit is like a Atomic Nuclear bomb explosion on the tiniest scale.

When you have a Atomic Nuclear bomb explosion you convert all mass of atoms into that of EM energy, and that is accomplished by taking all the protons which are 840 rings of 1 MeV and cutting them away from their torus all at once. And taking all the neutrons--- those fully grown of 945 MeV and those not fully grown and exploding all of them into 1 MeV and even 0.5 MeV. and all the other wire-waves of EM Spectrum.

Yes, so I am getting closer to the intuition feel and see of how electric batteries work.

They store the 0.5 MeV by joining them up to form a full ring that is 1 MeV. They do not form proton toruses but form Neutrons as parallel plates. Some fill up neutrons that are not fully grown but most form a brand new Neutron starting at 1 MeV and growing it to be 945MeV.

Now when the battery is applied and turned on, the newly formed Neutrons from the charging of the Battery, that they nicely and steadily , calmly release 1 MeV particles which further are formed into 0.5 MeV, slowly and calmly they emit these particles into a steady stream circuit that operates the appliance.

So the picture is that of charging a battery is where the current in to recharge the battery, the electric current of 0.5MeV particles start to join pairwise inside the battery to form a 1 MeV ring for which it is building up a neutron for zinc or some other metal-- lithium say. And the neutron geometry is parallel plate. Not the rings of a proton forming a torus.

I suppose the parallel plate rings of a neutron looks like this.

______

______ side view

Top view would look like this of a ever increasing larger rings of a wire spiral that is in a plane.

Like a bar magnet showing its Lines of Force only a planar configuration.

__

__..=......._ | |

,-;,-' _..-----.:=._ | | _.=:.-----.._

_,',' ,-' _____`-:. | | .:-'_____

/ ,' ,' _.-''__...:..::. | | .::..:...__``-._ `,

,' / ,' ,' _,' _,,,_-.. | | ..-_,,,_ `,_ `, `,

.' / / ,' / ,' `, | | ,' `, \ `, \ \ `.

| / / ,' .' ,' `,| |,' `, `. `, \ \ |

| .' / | | .' `| |' `. | | \ `. |

| | | | | | | | | | | | | |

| | \ \ \ \ /| |\ / / / / | |

\ '. \ \ \ \ / | | \ / / / / .` /

\ `. \ \ `. `._ _.' | | `._ _.' .' / /

\ \ `. `._ `.._ `''=-'''| |```-=``' _..' _.' .'

`. `. `._ `-..__i;;:=;;;' | | `;;;=:;;j__..-' _.'

`._`-._ `-.._____..=:i,' | | `,j:=..____

`.._`--.....,-=;-' |__| `-;=-,.....--

`'------''

So that each magnetic monopole as 0.5MeV joined pairwise making a 1 MeV monopole forms a Neutron once it reaches 945MeV.

This must be the case in order for Slow steady release of electric current, as it eats up the neutron ring by ring in a steady current flow.

However, if the battery is short circuited, several of the newly formed neutrons in Recharging process, want to exit all at once and you have many of the 1 MeV and the 0.5MeV exiting the battery from several of the newly formed neutrons.

So, normal current steady flow is like Beta decay of the neutrons, while a short circuit of the battery is like a Atomic Nuclear bomb blast getting started.

Which brings up a nice Experiment to tell me if I am on the correct path.

Experiment of Short Circuit, only by professional physicists

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recharge a battery, or have a fully charged battery. It probably needs to be a fair sized battery, larger than AAA or AA.

Now have the equipment necessary to record whether in the short circuit, that 1 MeV particles are emitted, whether Gamma rays or neutrinos of 1 MeV.

You see the difference between a normal regular current and a short circuit, is that you are disintegrating a neutron in a calm manner or in a fast manner.

And this makes sense in that you have two types of electric output--- the calm steady stream and the violent fast emission of short circuit.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 17, 2026, 11:43:26 AM (4 days ago) Jul 17

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Yes of course, supporting evidence, the 238 Pu is the best RTG for spacecraft and if we look at the isotopes of Pu, they range from 236 to 244, where 238 is deficient in neutrons, like a low battery. As if we start with 244Pu a full battery which 6 of its neutrons can be harnessed for electricity. 238Pu decay chain goes into more beta emitters of 234Th then 234Pa then 234U.

Strontium 90 is the best RTG other than spacecraft. Sr isotopes range from 82 to 90 so a fully charged battery in this perspective. Sr90 decays into 90Y which is another beta emitter. So we begin to look at each atom as a battery itself and the number of neutrons as a electric power station with Beta decay as a current of steady flow.

Then also Cu66 is a full battery element, and the pacemaker element Pm147 is a full battery.

In fact we can look at all the isotopes of each element as to whether they are a battery and a low charged battery or a fully charged battery.

So the perspective geometry of How a Battery works and how Recharging works is that of **neutrons are parallel plate capacitors, storing the 0.5MeV and the joined 1 MeV particles produced by the Proton+ Muon. Or, storing electricity in Recharging a battery by forming new neutrons not present before.

A full battery is a battery that releases slowly each parallel plate which is composed of the monopoles. If a slow release, then a useable current and where the orderly release is tied to the fact that the 0.5MeV monopoles were orderly stored by building the Parallel Plate.

We have a similar technology situation in the "cloud" where we tag a broken message, a big message broken into pieces but being tagged, so that when retrieved from the cloud, the tags connect up and the message appears full.

Now I doubt that we can tag a 0.5 MeV monopole, to paint it so to speak so that we can watch it as it Recharges a low battery, then observe it as it comes out to run a appliance. If we could do such a thing, we could fill a low battery to recharge and see a orderly procession of the monopoles 1, 2, 3, 4, up to 10^22 monopoles. Then when using the battery for a application, see whether the first monopole out is 10^22, next 10^22 minus one, and last of all 4, 3, 2, 1.

But on the other hand, this is likely easily verified. For I understand that you can send radio waves over a power line of magnetic monopoles. So that say we play a song on the radio and if it is the same song coming out, is proof that the flow of radio waves is a Ordered Procession and that magnetic monopoles as electric current is a Ordered Procession. If we prove that, then we will have proven that a battery is Neutron geometry of parallel plates in which monopoles are wound in a sequence procession, packed in a sequence and coming out in that sequence backwards.

Now, one thing I have experienced with headlamp batteries, is that when the power seems to get low, I turn the lamp off, then turn it back on and I get what seems to be a momentary power surge of light. Maybe I am mistaken, but say I am correct on this momentary power surge. A Surge would make sense in that the procession of monopoles unraveling in each neutron is paused and allowing the neutrons to Reset, so that when the lamp is turned on we have this surge of light.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 17, 2026, 12:11:25 PM (4 days ago) Jul 17

to Plutonium Atom Universe

On Friday, July 17, 2026 at 10:43:26 AM UTC-5 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

(snipped)

So the perspective geometry of How a Battery works and how Recharging works is that of **neutrons are parallel plate capacitors, storing the 0.5MeV and the joined 1 MeV particles produced by the Proton+ Muon. Or, storing electricity in Recharging a battery by forming new neutrons not present before.

So, when I first studied physics in High School and College, I would soon learn that electricity current exists only when there is a CIRCUIT. No circuit, no current. And these circuit currents, especially in chemistry were divided into 2 parts-- the anode and the cathode.

And the flow of current always had to go from one to the other.

Later I learned of Induction as if a pull in the circuit, a Electromagnetic Potential-- a pull. And of course I learned the Electromotive Force, a push of electricity, and that the two were always together---- in a circuit a pull and a push.

Later I learned there is a Positron-- the identical particle to the Magnetic monopole but of a different direction (some like to say different signage, one positive the other negative). And of course the fools of Old Physics thought the 0.5 MeV particle was the Atom's electron-- no, you fool that is the magnetic monopole.

So here I am, some 76- 21 =55 years later figuring out How a Battery works and how a battery is recharged.

Circuit is essential. The unit of electricity is the 0.5MeV particle called magnetic monopole. And the rings in the proton torus all 840 rings of 840MeV, is each ring composed of a positron and a monopole so that 0.5 + 0.5 = 1 MeV???

Late in life in 1990s, I learned that Space is a positron ocean from Dirac.

When I look at the Lines of Force pattern of iron filings with bar magnet as those closed loops, I just cannot help myself but think a Circuit, a electric current in Circuit is 1/2 a positron and the other 1/2 is a magnetic monopole.

The unit of electricity is for sure 0.5MeV magnetic monopole, but it seems as though Nature, allows the monopole to become a positron at will. If we pack a bunch of magnetic monopoles together, that half of them flip over to become positrons and instantly join up with the magnetic monopoles to become 1 MeV rings. The muon is 105 of these rings, the proton torus is 840 of these rings and a Neutron starts out at 1 eV and grows into being a fully mature neutron at 945 rings of 1 MeV each.

So, what law-structure of EM theory is this ring attraction of???? Not gravity, no, that is too weak. Not Faraday or Ampere. But I believe this universal attraction of a slew of 0.5 MeV monopoles, for half of them to instantly flip into becoming Positrons and then joining up with their other half for form a full closed ring--- the circuit--- is the true nature of the Coulomb law-structure.

In other words, the Coulomb law I learned in High School and College was just the partial fraction of the full Coulomb law-structure.

The Full Coulomb Law-structure

--------------------------------------------------

The unit of electric current is 0.5 MeV Magnetic Monopole. But that is only a semi circle, not a full circle. So when you have a bunch of monopoles, then half of them will flip in direction and become Positrons. Once you have half monopoles and half positrons, they join together naturally to form 1 MeV closed loop circles or ellipses or pencil ellipses. And these 1 MeV circuits go to build Protons of 840 MeV, mature neutrons of 945 MeV and the Muons of 105 MeV.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 17, 2026, 9:00:07 PM (4 days ago) Jul 17

to Plutonium Atom Universe

It is beautiful how science works. I started this book wanting to know how a battery actually works and how recharging it works.

I end up with an answer, that mostly involves Neutrons. And as a neutron inside atoms are parallel plate capacitors-- a battery the neutron is a tiny model of the human sized batteries.

But that is the way of doing science, in that a quest for something leads to more new quests.

Solving how a battery works helps me solve how the Ionic bond, covalent bond and metallic bond works. All three involve the 0.5 MeV magnetic monopoles as attracting one another, only not as the electrons of atoms, but as monopoles that are confined to Neutrons which are surrounding the Proton torus.

In 1968 studying High School chemistry, we learned that chemistry is about the 0.5MeV particle as pictured floating around the outside of a dense nucleus composed of proton balls and neutron balls.

In New Chemistry we have a totally new picture. A atom is a single proton torus, with increasing size according to atomic number. Inside the proton torus are muons as bar magnets and are the electrons of atoms. Proton and Muons engaged in the Faraday law-structure producing new electricity. Outside the proton torus reside all the neutrons which are parallel plate capacitors storing some of this newly made electricity in magnetic monopoles of 0.5MeV. It is these monopoles residing in the neutrons that causes Chemical bonding.

When I first learned chemistry in 1968, the saying was--- Chemistry is determined by the electron. Not true today, for the true electron is the Muon. But we can say that Chemistry is determined by the Neutrons which hold the 0.5MeV particles.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 18, 2026, 4:55:10 AM (3 days ago) Jul 18

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Neutron lifetime Anomaly solved

----------------------------------------------------

Now there is a anomaly of about 9 seconds in neutron decay, depending on which experiment is used--- beam or bottle.

Now this anomaly is easily solved in recognition of the idea that every neutron is somewhat different from every other neutron and depending on what isotope the neutron comes from.

Neutrons grow from 1 eV out to total of 945 MeV. They are parallel plate capacitors turning EM wire waves into parallel plates.

I have not spotted yet where the neutrons from Bottle experiment come from and those of the Beam experiment. I doubt they come from the same isotope.

So the trouble in Old Physics, where physics professors rarely if ever take a course in Logic in college to help them think straight and clear and correct--- for it is a horrendous mistake to think that a neutron from a heavy element atom is the same as a neutron from say tritium.

So, no wonder they have a 9 second error. And then when logic dolts of physics find this discrepancy they come up with the most obnoxious and mindless resolutions--- dark matter fantasies, even NASA's Lunar Prospector-- no logical brains.

Depending on which isotope a neutron is experimented will give different lifetimes, as one neutron maybe having 1 monopole; another having 2 monopoles. Some neutron experiments report a Photon emission along with a decay to a Proton+Muon, magnetic monopole, and monopole antineutrino.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 18, 2026, 6:29:16 PM (3 days ago) Jul 18

to Plutonium Atom Universe

The Standard Model of Physics is moron science at its worst

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most practicing physicists today, never took Logic in college and are unable to think straight, clear and correctly.

If you have a Standard Model that has anomalies in every one of the four basic fundamental particles.

Proton 840 MeV as a proton torus with muon inside

Neutron 1 to 945 MeV

Muon (as true electron) 105 MeV

Magnetic Monopole (the 0.5MeV particle)

Every one of those 4 Fundamental particles of Physics and Chemistry is anomalous to the stupid Standard Model.

A High School student would toss out the Standard Model because when a model gets 4 out of 4 wrong, it is 100% wrong and needs to be thrown onto the trash pile.

1) The Proton anomalous Magnetic Moment

2) The Neutron anomaly of lifetime in free neutron decay of 9 seconds anomaly

3) Muon magnetic anomaly of a far larger magnetic field than the Standard Model predicts

4) The 0.5MeV magnetic moment anomaly

Old Physics and Old Chemistry were rather "stupid sciences" because in 1897 Thomson found a particle of 0.5MeV, and he instinctively along with all the other scientists of the time believed what he had found was the electron of Atoms. When a mind has little to no Logic, that mind never questions-- could it be the magnetic monopole of Atoms and not the electron of Atoms??? Because in 1936, another particle called the Muon was discovered, and this muon would qualify far far better than the Thomson particle as being the electron of Atoms.

Moral theme of the story: When you do not study Logic and yet logic is required to be a good scientist, then you invariably end up with stupid, sick foolish physics.

When we switch the electron of atoms to be the Muon, stuck inside a 840 MeV proton torus, and see the 0.5MeV particle as the Curie-Dirac magnetic monopole, we _____no longer_____ have 4 anomalies at the heart of physics and chemistry.

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 19, 2026, 7:28:48 AM (2 days ago) Jul 19

to Plutonium Atom Universe

A spectacular proof that chemical bonding involves only neutrons and the magnetic monopoles that reside on neutrons.

I have had some spectacular proofs in math and physics, but now I am going to have a spectacular proof in chemistry.

I remember taking Chemistry in High School, Wyoming Ohio High School, a top grade school in Ohio, however, it used PSSC for physics which I was disappointed in for it was mostly over our heads. But worst yet was chemistry at Wyoming Ohio High School for its textbook was so poor that I remember little to anything.

Then at UC, University of Cincinnati I took chemistry. Cannot remember if it was Freshman or Sophomore year and the textbook was excellent in Mortimer, "Chemistry: A Conceptual Approach" 1967, and quoting from page 78.

--- quoting Mortimer---

Figure 3.11 The relation between position in the periodic classification and metallic or nonmetallic reactivity.

--- end quoting Mortimer---

The diagram of the Periodic Table shows 87Fr as the most reactive metal and shows 9F as the most reactive nonmetal.

That diagram stuck with me ever since I learned it in 1968-9. Out of 103 elements in the Periodic Table only 23 are nonmetals, the rest all metals. That is a percentage of 23/103 =0.223 22% nonmetals and 78% metals. Now I know that pi/4 is 78% but whether that is relevant is the question.

So, I was wondering, why on Earth would the Periodic Table be 78% metals and of course it would say something important about Chemistry over all.

But I never explored it after Chemistry in college in 1968-9.

But, that question really comes up big-time now, where the true electron of Atoms is the Muon stuck inside a single big proton torus (all the protons join together to form a single big proton torus) and the muons inside form a chain of muons that thrust through in the Faraday law-structure producing new electricity.

The magnetic monopoles are the 0.5MeV particles and are the units of electric current and formed inside neutrons as parallel plate capacitors which are located outside the proton torus and surround the proton torus. Bonding of ionic, covalent and metallic is monopoles of one neutron in one atom attracted to a monopole of another different atom residing on a neutron. The metallic bond would be seen as a stream of monopoles on one atom attracted to a stream of monopoles on another atom, and this is why the metallic bond has the highest heat of melting and can be malleable and ductile.

But, the question remains, why are the elements 78% metals????

And the answer is quite loud and clear when we see that the magnetic monopoles reside on neutrons. The S, P, D, F orbitals describes Neutron Arrangement around a single proton torus. Capacitors need to be made of metal to be the best working capacitors. And so the majority of neutrons as capacitors are metallic behavior.

This is the reverse argument of asking how does a battery work? Where the answer is that the battery is a capacitor and the neutrons inside atoms is a capacitor. So that a battery in biology life is like a large scale neutron.

Reversing that--- A neutron is a battery and the best batteries need metal to work. So, most of the elements 78% are metallic.

A say a spectacular proof because Old Physics, Old Chemistry, never even had the original question on its radar screen--- Why are 78% of elements metals???

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,

Jul 19, 2026, 8:00:48 PM (2 days ago) Jul 19

to Plutonium Atom Universe

Alright, I got what I wanted and more. I wanted to know how a Battery works and how Recharging works. The answer was beautiful. In that a battery made by humans is the same as the neutron is a capacitor battery in every Atom that exists.

A human made battery is merely a carbon copy although on a larger scale than what already exists inside of every atom--- its neutrons.

But now, carrying that idea forward, I need to Revolutionize all of Old Chemistry.

Old Chemistry was so stupid that it thought the 0.5MeV particle was the Atom's electron--- false--- the Atom's electron is the muon stuck inside a proton torus. That means the entire Table of Periodic Chemical Elements needs a drastic overhaul.

No longer do we have stupid notions that Flourine wants a negative charge to be like Neon atom. Or that lithium wants to give up a -1 charge to be like helium atom.

Although we do keep the format of the Table with its S, P, D, F orbitals and the picture of the Table we keep. However, we reinterpret that picture.

And the reinterpretation is that by increasing one atom to be the next atom by adding one more Proton, that it is a GEOMETRY OF AN EVER INCREASINGLY LARGER SINGLE PROTON TORUS.

The picture of the Periodic Table hints that the geometry is a TORUS.

I say this because of the fact of Family Resemblances. Look at the Table and column 11 is 29 Copper, 47 Silver, 79 Gold, have what is known as a family resemblance. For copper, silver, gold share many of the very same characteristics.

For there to exist the Family Resemblances in each column, implies the Overall Geometry Structure to be able to do that. And that geometry is a TORUS. So as you make a trip around the Atom of increasing Atomic Number, you come to 29 then back around you come to 47 and the elements have similar characteristics. That could only be true if the addition of one more proton is a Torus geometry.

Reply all

Reply to author

Forward