color of Universe changed from green to silver? Silver as in plutonium?
Archimedes Plutonium
overall color. They determine this from the light waves of numerous
galaxies.
The average wavelength. Last month they said the overall cosmos was
a green color, sort of turquois green. Now they say there was a error in
their software and that the revised color of the cosmos is a "silvery"
color.
Would the Big Bang theory have a color for the cosmos? No, because
the Big Bang says the cosmos is not a "thing". But an Atom Totality
would have a color and its color would be the color of the chemical
element. A Plutonium Atom Totality of its last six electrons would be
a silvery color.
In the revised color it was reported to be silvery. Now, the elements
of neptunium and uranium and thorium are also silvery color and the
human eye can distinguish between these silvery colored elements.
So, I wonder as the years go by now and more and more measurements
and determination of the color of the Universe, whether that color will
come closer and closer to matching the color of plutonium rather than
its neighboring elements which are also silver colored.
Archimedes Plutonium
As I heard in the news last night that the colour of the Universe was
mistakenly given as turquois green last month. Then the researchers
found a computer software error and their latest determination of colour
is now that of a beige or "tan" colour. But what is a tan colour? Is it
not gray where you add black with white? Is not silver a gray colour?
Is not silver a mix of black and white with mostly white depending on
the shade of gray?
Question: if the elements of thorium, uranium, neptunium and plutonium
were made colours of (they are all silvery color) would they have
much of a difference between them that a person could recognize-- hey
that is thorium and not neptunium silver? If a person was shown 4
color charts each representing one thorium, one uranium, one neptunium
and one plutonium would they be able to identify each?
Colour for a Big Bang universe makes no sense because in the Big Bang
theory the Universe is not a "thing", is not an "object". So to ascribe the
Universe with a color is just trivia. But to a theory that says the
Universe
is an object and is a thing-- an atom-- then that atom would have a
color and the colour would have to match what the object is. The colour
of the atom gold is yellowish. If the Atom Totality of the Universe was
a Gold Atom Totality, then the researchers of the color of the Universe
would have recently reported (without computer software glitches),
would have reported that the universe is a "yellow color".
But the Universe is not a Gold Atom Totality (it was in its long distant
past), for our present universe is a Plutonium Atom Totality and it would
have a color that matches plutonium. That color is silvery.
So, as the researchers of the color of the universe become more
refined in their data and observations, the Plutonium Atom Totality
would predict that the colour of the Universe will turn out to be
more and more silvery to match the color of plutonium.
At the moment they are calling it "beige" or "tan" but as they become
more refined and precise in measurement they will become matching
the color of the element plutonium.
Archimedes Plutonium
(snip)
>
>
> Colour for a Big Bang universe makes no sense because in the Big Bang
> theory the Universe is not a "thing", is not an "object". So to ascribe the
> Universe with a color is just trivia. But to a theory that says the
> Universe is an object and is a thing-- an atom-- then that atom would have a
> color and the colour would have to match what the object is. The colour
> of the atom gold is yellowish. If the Atom Totality of the Universe was
> a Gold Atom Totality, then the researchers of the color of the Universe
> would have recently reported (without computer software glitches),
> would have reported that the universe is a "yellow color".
>
On second thoughts, the Big Bang although an amorphous nothing, a
nonentity would have a color because of the red-shift of the initial
explosion. So, for the Big Bang theory the colour of the universe
should be reddish.
For the Atom Totality theory, the overall color of the Universe would
match the color of the chemical element that the Universe is. If we are
in a Plutonium Atom Totality of 231Pu, then the color of the universe
should be that of a silvery colour matching the color of the chemical
element of plutonium.
Now, I suspect but I do not know if an isotope of a chemical element
always has the same color as its other isotopes? Are all of the isotopes of
gold that same yellowish color? Are all isotopes of uranium the same
silvery color?
Trouble is that no-one has been able to nucleosynthesize 231Pu. I contend
that it is impossible to nucleosynthesize 231Pu because it is the Atom
Totality element.
Is there some mathematics in the Schrodinger Equation that can relate the
colour of isotopes?
Uncle Al
>
> Sat, 09 Mar 2002 15:00:45 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> (snip)
Hey, hey... It's the boring trolling prolix moron featured in
"Discovery" magazine as an example of the intellectually bottom-most
whale shit in Usenet.
Ooga-booga, Archie-Poo. Ooga-booga.
This is how a real man does it - one with big brass danglers and a
triple-digit IQ,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
The proper test of spacetime geometry is geometry.
(Now with bitch'n Virtual Realty display)
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
Graham Pratt
> Sat, 09 Mar 2002 15:00:45 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> (snip)
> always has the same color as its other isotopes? Are all of the isotopes of
> gold that same yellowish color? Are all isotopes of uranium the same
> silvery color?
I am not an expert on this kind of stuff, but just think: Does the perceived
colour of some material depend on the size of it's crystal lattice or
molecular spacing in conjunction with the wavelength of light falling on
it, so that most wavelengths are trapped by the feature size and only a
few (e.g. yellow for gold) are re-radiated? For example plain old garden
variety carbon can be quite black, but wit a diamond it is clear. Same
old carbon, just stacked in a different pattern.
And what colour is silver anyway? Is a mirror silver? Is chromium
silver? Is it not perhaps a surface that if it were rougher would look
white, but because it is very smooth and does not selectively absorb
any wavelengths it looks like a clear mirror. If it absorbed every
wavelength except yellow then it would look like gold. If it were the
same but a rougher surface it would look yellow, not gold.
What colour is silicon? Peek through an EPROM window and you will see
a rainbow of sorts. Other times it looks silver. Hmm...
GP.
Archimedes Plutonium
> Archimedes Plutonium <plut...@willinet.net> wrote in message news:<3C8A8D1D...@willinet.net>...
> > Sat, 09 Mar 2002 15:00:45 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > (snip)
>
> > Now, I suspect but I do not know if an isotope of a chemical element
> > always has the same color as its other isotopes? Are all of the isotopes of
> > gold that same yellowish color? Are all isotopes of uranium the same
> > silvery color?
>
> I am not an expert on this kind of stuff, but just think: Does the perceived
> colour of some material depend on the size of it's crystal lattice or
> molecular spacing in conjunction with the wavelength of light falling on
> it, so that most wavelengths are trapped by the feature size and only a
> few (e.g. yellow for gold) are re-radiated? For example plain old garden
> variety carbon can be quite black, but wit a diamond it is clear. Same
> old carbon, just stacked in a different pattern.
I would suspect it depends on those and more. But I am not looking for
"colour" as to what a human eyeball will register in brain.
I think what I am looking for, and suspect that these researchers into
the "colour of the Universe" is a fundamental characteristic of electrons.
Chemistry is the science of electrons and it is fair to say that colour of
an electron is a basic property just as spin or angular momentum.
Everything has a color whether black, white, r.o.y.g.b.i.v. or gray and
everything in between.
I am not looking for colour as perceived by eyeball and brain but color
as a fundamental characteristic of the electron.
>
>
> And what colour is silver anyway? Is a mirror silver? Is chromium
> silver? Is it not perhaps a surface that if it were rougher would look
> white, but because it is very smooth and does not selectively absorb
> any wavelengths it looks like a clear mirror. If it absorbed every
> wavelength except yellow then it would look like gold. If it were the
> same but a rougher surface it would look yellow, not gold.
>
I believe silver is a mix of black and white. Gray. Silver is a shade of
grays.
>
> What colour is silicon? Peek through an EPROM window and you will see
> a rainbow of sorts. Other times it looks silver. Hmm...
>
> GP.
Yes, okay. Transparency has no color. The noble-gases are colorless.
I want to express a mistake I made in my earlier post. I said the Big
Bang would ascribe a color to the Universe even though the Big Bang
posits that the Universe is not an entity or a thing. The color that the
Big Bang ascribes arises from the fact of the explosion and a redshift.
I said that due to the redshift of the Big Bang that the Universe should
be a reddish color. I was wrong. It should be blue or bluish. And the
recent researchers with a "tan" color is data that does not support the
Big Bang theory.
Some may argue that since the Big Bang Universe is a nonentity and
not a thing that the colour of a Big Bang Universe should be colourless
or transparent. That maybe the case. I am not sure. But whether the
Big Bang implies a transparent universe or a blue universe, the recent
data suggests neither one of these.
Uncle Al
>
> Archimedes Plutonium <plut...@willinet.net> wrote in message news:<3C8A8D1D...@willinet.net>...
> > Sat, 09 Mar 2002 15:00:45 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > (snip)
Don't post to the trolling moron. When you wrestle with a pig in shit
you both get covered - but the pig LIKES it.
Ron Smernoff
Didn't you read the bible. The color is white.
"Archimedes Plutonium" <plut...@willinet.net> wrote in message
news:3C8A8D1D...@willinet.net...
Uncle Al
>
> Whattssamatter, folks?
>
> Didn't you read the bible. The color is white.
>
> "Archimedes Plutonium" <plut...@willinet.net> wrote in message
> news:3C8A8D1D...@willinet.net...
> > Sat, 09 Mar 2002 15:00:45 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > (snip)
Eurocentric racist. The color is an empowering Peoples-of-Colour mud
brown.
Don't post to the moron troll. Archie-Poo is a pig wrestling in its
own shit - he likes spreading the smell. Dig Archie-Poo's 15 minutes
of fame in the recent "Discover" magazine, calling him out as one of
Usenet's most odious trolling idiots.
Chris Wiegand
originates from electronic transitions within the atomic or molecular
orbital manifold. The electronic structure of matter is independent of
the number of nuetrons in the nucleus, therefore, does not depend on
isotope number.
As for the luster of silver and other metals, that phenomenon is
explained by the conduction-band electron's in a metal, and their
ability to respond to the electric field of incoming light.
Archimedes Plutonium
(snip)
> Color, or a material's ability to absorb photons of a given color,
> originates from electronic transitions within the atomic or molecular
> orbital manifold. The electronic structure of matter is independent of
> the number of nuetrons in the nucleus, therefore, does not depend on
> isotope number.
>
> As for the luster of silver and other metals, that phenomenon is
> explained by the conduction-band electron's in a metal, and their
> ability to respond to the electric field of incoming light.
>
Concur. Care to make a comment about "transparent material" such as
glass? With a mirror, its color is silvery and thus a shade of gray-color.
With a Noble gas such as neon or many others it is transparent because
there is not enough quantity-density to see it. But when liquified it
becomes visible with a color.
So, if a mirror is silver colored then what color is glass which is transparent?
Unlike transparent gas where there is not enough material to see a color,
with glass there is enough material? Is all color dependent upon "reflection"?
Archimedes Plutonium
>
>
> I think what I am looking for, and suspect that these researchers into
> the "colour of the Universe" is a fundamental characteristic of electrons.
> Chemistry is the science of electrons and it is fair to say that colour of
> an electron is a basic property just as spin or angular momentum.
> Everything has a color whether black, white, r.o.y.g.b.i.v. or gray and
> everything in between.
>
I made several mistakes in that post above. The most glaring is probably
the mistake of saying that "colour" is a fundamental property of an atom
just as spin or angular momentum. I disagree with that assessment. Spin
and angular momentum are the electron and one cannot get any more
basic or fundamental than spin and angular momentum.
I believe "colour" is a statistical property. Temperature is a statistical
property and a single atom of plutonium has an internal temperature
created from the Coulomb photon interactions that hold all of the 94
electrons to the 94 protons of the nucleus. Within all of those Coulomb
interactions creates a thermodynamics described by DeBroglie. Those
Coulomb interactions number 95!/2 value for 94 electrons to protons
at any given moment in time. This large number creates a thermodynamic
statistic creating a temperature inside of a given plutonium atom. That
temperature as observed by astronomers is 2.71 K (actually in the
Atom Totality theory the mathematical number e itself is the cosmic
temperature).
Color of an atom is similar to temperature of an atom created from its
Coulombic interactions. So, what I want to say in this post is to correct
myself from the mistake of saying that colour is as fundamental as
spin. That is untrue. Colour, however, is a property intrinsic to every
atom just as the property of an "internal temperature" is intrinsic
to every atom.
So, as future astronomers and physicists match the Cosmic temperature
with the internal temperature of a single plutonium atom at 2.71 Kelvin,
so also will they match the intrinsic colour of a single plutonium atom
with a silvery color *a particular wavelength* and match the cosmic
colour as also plutonium-silver. As these measurements become more
refined and precise through the centuries, scientists will be able to
see that the Universe-color matches not thorium silver, not uranium silver
and not neptunium silver. But matches plutonium silver the best.
Just as the internal thermodynamics of thorium or uranium or
neptunium do not match 2.71 Kelvin. But only plutonium matches the
2.71 Kelvin.
__________
From: Archimedes...@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.plutonium,sci.physics,sci.physics.
particle,sci.chem,sci.physics.electromag,sci.astro
Subject: Re: Minimum Coulomb Interactions for plutonium
Date: 30 Sep 1995 02:39:12 GMT
Organization: Plutonium College
Lines: 92
Message-ID: <44iakg$3...@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>
In article <44e36n$a...@rzsun02.rrz.uni-hamburg.de>
fc3...@AMRISC03.math.uni-hamburg.de (Hauke Reddmann) writes:
> And Pu is then the case where even the Schroedinger
> equation can't be written out. (Remember that Pu has a so high
> mass number that relativistic effects come in.) In this case you
> use approximations, like treating closed shells as a spherically
> symmetric potential. Of course the calculations then are not
> nearly exact as in the H case.
> So, which value should YOU use? As you are sort of a
> neopythagorean, I fear you won't be satisfied with approximations
> and must use the 95!/2 value. Even worse, this only nails down
> the coulomb interactions. There are loads of second-order effects
> due to spin dependent interactions.
> Hope this helps. This post got very long, but you see what happens
> when you get into the realm of "dirty" science, with all sorts of
> models, approximations and calculations.
Thank you very much both Hauke Reddmann and Gerald L. Hurst, and
bless the both of you to the Fields of Elysium.
The Coulombic states is a very large number indeed. And it is
commonsense and intuition that says that a neon atom is held in
place by lots more than just 190 things going on. Neon is held up
by at least 10^7 things going on.
I can use any of these large numbers for plutonium,
(2^188 x2x2x2) of (n,L,M_L,m_s), or the 95!/2, or the one which
I favor the most since as of recent it comes from the Hydrogen
Atom Systems where all the forces are either Coulombic or
Radioactivity. Thus 231PU is ((2^231) x2x2x2) or 232!/2.
With those large numbers it really does not matter for the
difference of one more electron and proton in the next element
after plutonium, which is element 95. These numbers are so huge
and that is what is needed in order to compose a thermodynamics.
I could not compose a satisfying thermodynamics for plutonium
with just 94x187 = 17578 things going on.
The cosmic microwave background radiation is blackbody radiation.
The fact that it is blackbody seems to have escaped the attention of
virtually every physicist and scientist alive except me. For if they
deny that they missed it, and understood what it means to be blackbody
and the implication of something "being" a blackbody, because blackbody
directly implies a structure, yes, a structure, then ask them what
structure they understood it to be if they claim they understood it
initially? An onion?
I have combed every science magazine and journal and have never seen
any physicist or writer display that math logic reasoning and well
thinking for all mention blackbody but noone said or printed the next
logical step, if blackbody then it is a structure. Our observable
universe is a structure itself.
I knew the structure to be a blackbody cavity because the 94th+93rd
electron space is a blackbody cavity and that is why the night sky is
black because it is a blackbody cavity. Get it -- blackbody means
black.
The book LA THERMODYNAMIQUE DE LA PARTICULE ISOLEE
(OU THERMODYNAMIQUE CACHEE DES PARTICULES)
(btw, I like that title with the word "cachee"
and obviously this book is written in French and it is one of the
greatest books ever written. It is truly amazing of the dazzling genius
of Debroglie to have anticipated so much in advance) written by
Debroglie, 1964, considers the relativistic fluctuations of mass of
subatomic particles such as the protons, electrons. And then associates
temperature with a relativistic statistical mechanic.
I am following Debroglie's intuition, except replacing relativistic
mass fluctuations with statistical quantum fluctuations of the Coulomb
interactions for a plutonium atom in order to derive an intrinsic
associated temperature for an electron cavity, which is simply the
space occupied by an electron of 231 plutonium atom.
Let me use 95!/2 or either 232!/2 as the "Coulombic states" and with
this large number of statistical interactions, I propose to find an
intrinsic temperature for the 94th electron of an isolated plutonium
atom.
From pages 94-101, Debroglie works with the formula 1/T = dS/dL
where T is temperature, dS is the derivative of entropy with respect to
the lagrangian L which is kinetic energy of a system minus the
potential energy of that system. Debroglie derives the formula m_0cc =
kT_0 , then where M_0 is proportional to the factor e^(S/k) as M_0 =
m_0 thus the entropy is proportional to the Boltzmann factor
e^(-M_0/m_0), thence 1/T = e^(-M_0/m_0)/ d L. Now taking the idea of a
neutron of a neptunium atom radioactively growing to transform into a
plutonium atom in which the term d L is very close to 1 by the factor
(neutron/neutron) - ((proton + electron)/neutron). So 1/T =
e^(-188/186) K/1 which is 1/T = 1/e^(188/186) K. So the thermodynamic
of the isolated plutonium atom or the blackbody temperature of a
plutonium atom is exp188/186 K which is the value of 2.74 degrees
Kelvin. The presently determined value by the COBE satellite for the
cosmic background microwave temperature of the observable universe is
2.735 + 0.06 K. I assert that it is not coincidence that the value for
the cosmic background microwave radiation temperature of 2.7 is close
to the value of the number e in maths.
__________
James Hunter
Uncle Al wrote:
> Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >
> > Sat, 09 Mar 2002 15:00:45 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > (snip)
> Nothing.
>
> Hey, hey... It's the boring trolling prolix moron featured in
> "Discovery" magazine as an example of the intellectually bottom-most
> whale shit in Usenet.
>
> Ooga-booga, Archie-Poo. Ooga-booga.
>
> This is how a real man does it - one with big brass danglers and a
> triple-digit IQ,
>
> http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
> The proper test of spacetime geometry is geometry.
> (Now with bitch'n Virtual Realty display)
Geometry is neither a test, nor spacetime.
As scientists need to be reminded daily,
what it is, is a moron's version of logic.
Jos Bergervoet
>
> As I heard in the news last night that the colour of the Universe
> was mistakenly given as turquois green last month.
Turquois green! Any fool can see that this would violate your
Theory of Atom Totality, right Archie?)
-- Jos
Jos Bergervoet
>
>> ...
Archie! We most explicitely agreed that you would not do that
again, didn't we?
-- Jos
island
>
> Uncle Al wrote:
>
> > Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > >
> > > Sat, 09 Mar 2002 15:00:45 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > (snip)
> > Nothing.
> >
> > Hey, hey... It's the boring trolling prolix moron featured in
> > "Discovery" magazine as an example of the intellectually bottom-most
> > whale shit in Usenet.
> >
> > Ooga-booga, Archie-Poo. Ooga-booga.
> >
> > This is how a real man does it - one with big brass danglers and a
> > triple-digit IQ,
> >
> > http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
> > The proper test of spacetime geometry is geometry.
> > (Now with bitch'n Virtual Realty display)
> Geometry is neither a test... <SNIP>
WRONG answer.
Uncle Al
[snip]
Nothing.
It is the moron troll excoriated in "Discover" magazine! 15 minues of
fame ain't what it used to be.
Uncle Al
>
> Sun, 10 Mar 2002 01:09:55 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Nothing.
"Discover" magaizne is correct. Archie-Poo is a fish without a
bicycle (or a brain).
Graham Pratt
>
> Don't post to the trolling moron. When you wrestle with a pig in shit
> you both get covered - but the pig LIKES it.
The man has a unique point of view does he? I can live with that.
But did you notice that I am polite to him and as a consequence he
returns the favour? I too have my own ideas and naturally I know
I'm right and everybody else is wrong ;-) but big deal! If you don't
like what someone says, don't let them control you by you wasting
your time on it. While you're hyperventilating they are probably
laughing their head off, making you dance like a puppet on a string.
GP.
Archimedes Plutonium
>
>
> I believe "colour" is a statistical property. Temperature is a statistical
> property and a single atom of plutonium has an internal temperature
> created from the Coulomb photon interactions that hold all of the 94
>
(snips)
>
> > So, which value should YOU use? As you are sort of a
> > neopythagorean, I fear you won't be satisfied with approximations
> > and must use the 95!/2 value. Even worse, this only nails down
> > the coulomb interactions. There are loads of second-order effects
> > due to spin dependent interactions.
>
(snips)
>
> I knew the structure to be a blackbody cavity because the 94th+93rd
> electron space is a blackbody cavity and that is why the night sky is
> black because it is a blackbody cavity. Get it -- blackbody means
> black.
>
> The book LA THERMODYNAMIQUE DE LA PARTICULE ISOLEE
> (OU THERMODYNAMIQUE CACHEE DES PARTICULES)
Now there comes a big problem. And so often as in science and life,
what we think of as a problem at the moment often turns out to be a
blessing in disguise.
I am talking about the Atom Totality theory having a colour for the overall
atom and yet simultaneously having a blackbody cavity. Can you have
a blackbody cavity whose outside wall is coloured silver but the interior
of the blackbody is, well, mostly black.
You see, I am wrestling with the problem that our night sky is the 5f6 of
231Pu a perfect blackbody and that solves the black sky conundrum. And
it solves the idea that the microwave background cosmic radiation is 2.71
quantized.
But I am not so sure that this 5f6 blackbody cavity can have a silver colour
matching plutonium silver colour. Can you have colour for the 5f6 and
simultaneously have the 5f6 a blackbody cavity?
As I said, what we initially think of as a obstacle, often is a blessing upon
further information.
Uncle Al
[snip]
Nothing.
"Discovery" magazine says Archie-Poo is a loathsome psychotic Usenet
abuser, troll, and boring moron. That magazine has clearly improved
the empirical quality of its contents.
DSPhys
How many times in one group can "Uncle Al" make a combination of the words
moron and troll and their conjugates in one group?
"Uncle Al" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:3C8C05F2...@hate.spam.net...
Richard Herring
<dj.smit...@adfa.edu.au> writes
>Having read these posts for a week now, a question is raised:
>How many times in one group can "Uncle Al" make a combination of the words
>moron and troll and their conjugates in one group?
Never mind that; is the content substantively identical, and has he
exceeded the Breidbart index yet?
--
Richard Herring