Discussion:
Day of Reckoning for AP, King of Science, as to what is or is not a magnetic monopole-- photons, neutrinos, 0.5MeV particle.
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-21 19:23:22 UTC
Day of Reckoning for AP, King of Science, as to what is or is not a magnetic monopole-- photons, neutrinos, 0.5MeV particle.

The day of reckoning has come. I cannot wiggle out of this.

I must solve this puzzle in order to start the Junior High School TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS.
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-21 19:45:01 UTC
Re: Day of Reckoning for AP, King of Science, as to what is or is not a magnetic monopole-- photons, neutrinos, 0.5MeV particle. The day of reckoning has come. I cannot wiggle out of this. I must solve this puzzle in order to start the Junior High...

I remember in past posts of this topic that I separated photons from neutrinos as one being transverse while the other is longitudinal waves , but then I got mixed up as the years went by. So I am unclear at this moment where I last stood on this topic. This is one advantage of writing books on physics, for I can easily find out my last stance on this topic.

For the reader to appreciate what I must solve, let me state it this way-- we have particles of energy of low frequency such as radio waves in EM spectrum all the way up to high frequency, high energy gamma waves. Then we have neutrinos also, and then we have particles with rest mass starting with 0.5MeV. And on top of that we have the Magnetic Monopole, the Magnetic Dipole and we have Electricity, the E field and the magnetic field. And all of these particles and fields need to be unified into one picture, unified into one unit.

If you thought the Unification of 4 Forces of Physics was tough and daunting, well, here is something that is a million times more tough and daunting of a unification than was 4 forces.

In view of this ultra tough assignment, what I am going to do is make use of a tool I discovered way back in the 1990s. Where I proposed the theory that light wave was perfect DNA of biology.

To solve the unification of the 4 forces was the use of a logical principle-- find out which force has the most perfect particle which is the photon, and so EM was the unification force.

Here I face a huge huge uphill battle in unification of these EM particles. All of them are EM particles except for neutrinos but we can make the hypothesis that neutrinos are just EM with some sort of reverse feature trait.

So, what I am going to do is refer all of these particles of energy to biology, and say that the photon is either RNA or DNA or one of the 4 nucleotides or the double helix strands.

I am going to say that the strands are E field or B field and the perpendicular nucleotides are the B field or the E field.

I am going to say that biology DNA is a unified structure involving all of genetics, with the unit being the nucleotide. Same way, I am going to say that Magnetic Monopole is the unit structure of all EM energy. So I am saying the nucleotide is the magnetic monopole. If I pair Nucleotides A to T or C to G then I have a magnetic dipole. The electricity is the strands which the nucleotides cling to.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-21 19:59:12 UTC
This helps to refresh my memory, for in the past 30 years I have noticed a slow decline in my memory. Or, perhaps, as _I hope_, I have built up such a massive amount of science knowledge that I have a hard time in remembering it all.

Here is my last thoughts on the light wave was written in this recent book of mine.

Geometry of Transverse Wave of Physics, the Lightwave, compared to Longitudinal Wave//Physics focus series, book 12 by Archimedes Plutonium

File Size: 518 KB
Print Length: 40 pages
Publication Date: July 25, 2020
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC

Preface: Old Physics had the geometry and structure of light-waves all wrong. For they had a Double Sinusoid Transverse wave for light-waves. The true geometry and structure of the light-wave is Double Cycloid Transverse wave for all Electromagnetic radiation above frequency 17777 Hz and is Double Cycloid Longitudinal wave for all Electromagnetic radiation of frequency below 17777 Hz. This book goes through the many details of light-waves.

Cover Picture: is my photograph of a deconstructed DNA double helix molecule, deconstructed and then reassembled into a Double Cycloid Transverse wave with cross section looking like this shape + and where the nucleotides as seen in this as line segments become circles that create the cycloid curve path. Now each individual cycloid has three nucleotides, and that would mean 3 separate circles that create that cycloid curve path segment. That number 3 is important in the property of birefraction or called birefringent.

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

1) Two types of waves, transverse and longitudinal

2) Reliance on biology DNA and RNA to pry open the secrets of light-waves

3) The double cycloid wave

4) Polarization proves light-waves must be transverse

5) Trigonometry has been a huge burden of error filled math and physics

6) DNA model of light-wave, and why exterior nucleotides for transverse and interior nucleotides for longitudinal

7) Polarization and Reflection

8) Neutrino Waves, what they are

9) Easy proof DNA molecule of double helix is a double cycloid type of wave

10) Major properties of light waves

11) Refraction and Diffraction

12) Superposition and Interference

13) Birefringence

14) Light waves formed inside proton toruses and neutrinos formed inside capacitors in the Ampere law

15) Appendix: some reasoning behind this book
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-22 00:04:09 UTC
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Nov 21, 2020, 2:01 PM (4 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
This helps to refresh my memory, for in the past 30 years I have noticed a slow decline in my memory. Or, perhaps, as _I hope_, I have built up such a massive amount of science knowledge that I have a hard time in remembering it all.

Here is my last thoughts on the light wave was written in this recent book of mine.

Geometry of Transverse Wave of Physics, the Lightwave, compared to Longitudinal Wave//Physics focus series, book 12 by Archimedes Plutonium

File Size: 518 KB
Print Length: 40 pages
Publication Date: July 25, 2020
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC

Preface: Old Physics had the geometry and structure of light-waves all wrong. For they had a Double Sinusoid Transverse wave for light-waves. The true geometry and structure of the light-wave is Double Cycloid Transverse wave for all Electromagnetic radiation above frequency 17777 Hz and is Double Cycloid Longitudinal wave for all Electromagnetic radiation of frequency below 17777 Hz. This book goes through the many details of light-waves.

Cover Picture: is my photograph of a deconstructed DNA double helix molecule, deconstructed and then reassembled into a Double Cycloid Transverse wave with cross section looking like this shape + and where the nucleotides as seen in this as line segments become circles that create the cycloid curve path. Now each individual cycloid has three nucleotides, and that would mean 3 separate circles that create that cycloid curve path segment. That number 3 is important in the property of birefraction or called birefringent.

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

1) Two types of waves, transverse and longitudinal

2) Reliance on biology DNA and RNA to pry open the secrets of light-waves

3) The double cycloid wave

4) Polarization proves light-waves must be transverse

5) Trigonometry has been a huge burden of error filled math and physics

6) DNA model of light-wave, and why exterior nucleotides for transverse and interior nucleotides for longitudinal

7) Polarization and Reflection

8) Neutrino Waves, what they are

9) Easy proof DNA molecule of double helix is a double cycloid type of wave

10) Major properties of light waves

11) Refraction and Diffraction

12) Superposition and Interference

13) Birefringence

14) Light waves formed inside proton toruses and neutrinos formed inside capacitors in the Ampere law

15) Appendix: some reasoning behind this book

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
2:24 PM (4 hours ago)

to Plutonium Atom Universe
Say that all the 4 nucleotides were Magnetic Monopoles, and if two pair up, then that is a magnetic dipole.

Say electricity is the strands of RNA or DNA, the strands that carry the nucleotides. The sugar phosphate backbone of RNA or DNA.

Here we would want to know if the number 17777 Hz which splits off the longitudinal photon with the transverse photon, whether that number 17777 Hz relates to the number 0.5MeV where rest mass of photons arise.

Can we say that rest mass photons such as gamma photons with Pair Production of positron with 0.5MeV particle is this 17777 Hz.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
2:35 PM (3 hours ago)

to Plutonium Atom Universe
Can we say that all photons below 17777Hz are RNA for RNA has many varieties such as transfer RNA, messenger RNA, ribosomal RNA etc.

Can we say that rest mass emerges when two RNA form DNA?

And here we connect with the idea that a Cube has contained inside itself a Sphere of equal diameter to cube side, and is 52.3% volume of the Cube.

We can sort of visualize a Cell in biology as the cube and the DNA nuclear material as the sphere. Do we find a mathematical number relationship of 52.3 versus 47.7 of cell volume to nuclear material? I hope so.

But the idea here is we want a number of 0.5MeV wherein photons start having rest mass.

Now how does nucleotide chemistry form in cells? I mean, how is a nucleotide molecule borne and formed in cells? This would be the analog question of how a green visible light photon is borne in a proton torus from a muon thrusting through the torus.

AP

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
3:06 PM (3 hours ago)

to Plutonium Atom Universe
Here, what I am going to need is another unit. I have 1 of the 4 or more nucleotides (uracil the 5th), one of them is a magnetic monopole unit. So that paired nucleotides such as A to T or say C to G would be a magnetic dipole.

But I need Electric Field units also. I need where the strand, the sugar phosphate backbone comes in units. Where a unit of the strand would carry and hold a single nucleotide.

Does biology recognize a "unit of the strand" or is that too advanced of science for the biology community to have as yet discovered? Perhaps the chemistry community should be involved in this for it basically is more chemistry than biology.

We easily can see that the nucleotides of DNA, RNA are units.

But now we need the backbone strands of DNA and RNA to be in "units".

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-22 00:42:40 UTC
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
6:34 PM (now)

to Plutonium Atom Universe
Now, the coefficient of the Tau lepton particle rest mass is 1784 and the coefficient of the square root of speed of light in terms of frequency versus wavelength is 1777. Now, for Sigma Error that would be 1784/1777 = meagre 0.39%, not even 1%. And one of my very best sigma errors to date, of course, not as good as the 17*muons = 17*105 = 1785 versus 1784 for a 1785/1784 = 0.05% sigma error, not even a 0.1% sigma error.

But it is going to be a tough time in geometrically explaining what the tau particle has to do with the square root of EM spectrum and the fact that rest mass of Dirac's Magnetic Monopole is 0.5MeV.

Toughness of problems has never stopped AP from venturing forward, in fact, the King of Science relishes the tough problems, much as a physics or math professor relishes Danish rolls and coffee latte in the department lounge, trying to quiz graduate students when they do not want quizzing.

So let me take a poke at the answer, of a connection. At the square root of EM Spectrum of 17777Hz and 17777 wavelength, is where the photon can be either packaged up inside a Cubic with a Sphere inside, or, can be unpackaged of a Cubic with the Sphere being outside the cubic.

So the Tau particle is the geometry of EM Spectrum of high energy, the borderline of where EM is packaged up and inside a Cubic, a sphere packaged inside a cubic. Or think of it as the positron packaged inside a Cubic that is the Dirac magnetic monopole.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-22 03:19:02 UTC
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Nov 21, 2020, 9:14 PM
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Quoting the web--
A sugar-phosphate backbone (alternating grey-dark grey) joins together nucleotides in a DNA sequence. The sugar-phosphate backbone forms the structural framework of nucleic acids, including DNA and RNA. This backbone is composed of alternating sugarand phosphate groups, and defines directionality of the molecule.
--- end quote ---

AP writes: the alternating sugar and phosphate groups provides the "unit of the backbone. So I have units in the nucleotides and units in the backbone molecule.

That means, I can define the backbone as the Electric field and define the nucleotides as the magnetic field.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-22 04:59:10 UTC
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Nov 21, 2020, 10:48 PM
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Quoting Wikipedia--
A phosphodiester bond occurs when exactly two of the hydroxyl groups in phosphoric acid react with hydroxyl groups on other molecules to form two ester bonds.[1]
Diagram of phosphodiester bonds (PO43−) between three nucleotides.
Phosphodiester bonds are central to all life on Earthas they make up the backbone of the strands of nucleic acid. In DNA and RNA, the phosphodiester bond is the linkage between the 3' carbon atom of one sugar molecule and the 5' carbon atom of another, deoxyribose in DNA and ribose in RNA. Strong covalent bonds form between the phosphate group and two 5-carbon ring carbohydrates (pentoses) over two ester bonds.

--- end quoting Wikipedia ---

AP writes, apparently the nucleotides are bonded to the sugars of the sugar phosphate backbone. So I have magnetic monopoles as nucleotides and I have sugar-phosphate units as the electric unit. And looking at the schematics, I see 4 atoms of nitrogen for the nucleotides and 4 atoms of oxygen on the phosphate molecule.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-22 06:32:49 UTC
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Nov 22, 2020, 12:26 AM
to Plutonium Atom Universe
So we have in DNA, RNA we have nucleotides and we have sugar and phosphate molecules on the strands.

Now in the pictures of DNA or RNA, we have the sugars all aligned on the same side and the phosphates all aligned on the same opposite side as in this picture.

S
P
S
P
S
P

Now photons are perfect DNA and RNA, meaning that we can align the sugars and phosphates to alternate such as this picture.

P
S
P
S
P
S

And whereas the nucleotides are always bonded to the sugars we have two pictures.

N-S
P
N-S
P
N-S
P
And this.

P
S-N
P
N-S
P
S-N

So that in one case we can have a longitudinal wave, in the other case we have a transverse wave.

Now in this research analysis, I must end up identifying the Magnetic Monopole, the Magnetic Dipole, the photon, the neutrino and which is which for electric current and for magnetic field and for electric field.

So I am juggling 7 items.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-22 19:30:42 UTC
I wrote this chapter in my recent book, for in New Physics, the atoms have no nucleus as the error filled Rutherford Bohr model suggests. In that situation we require neutrino formation elsewhere inside of atoms.

Geometry of Transverse Wave of Physics, the Lightwave, compared to Longitudinal Wave//Physics focus series, book 12 by Archimedes Plutonium

Publication Date: July 25, 2020

14) Light waves formed inside proton toruses and neutrinos formed inside capacitors in the Ampere law

So far the discussion in this book has been about the geometry and structure of the transverse wave and longitudinal wave. But before I go on this book, some words and ideas have to be said of the fact that all light transverse waves are formed from a different region of the atom than the forming of neutrino waves. Apparently there exists in the universe an equal number of neutrinos as compared to light-waves. If the universe contains 10^80 in total of photon light-waves, it contains the same number in neutrinos. I have no proof or supporting evidence of this claim, except the idea of symmetry must hold.

And because the light-wave is identical to the neutrino except for spin, as discussed earlier, means the light wave and neutrino must come from two different regions of the atom but both regions doing related activities, such as one doing Faraday law and other doing Ampere law. Faraday law produces electricity, Ampere law produces magnetism. Neutrons of atoms are capacitors, protons are electricity generators as Faraday law. This implies that light waves come from the protons-muons doing the Faraday law inside proton toruses. Then neutrinos arise from electricity flowing inside neutrons as capacitors, producing neutrinos as magnetism.

So I said a neutrino is identical to its photon counterpart except for a spin direction. Here we can say a photon light wave is a E-field particle of double transverse wave, while the neutrino is a B-field particle of double transverse wave.
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-22 19:44:57 UTC
Those diagrams came out poorly, let me try again using spacers of .....

So we have in DNA, RNA we have nucleotides and we have sugar and phosphate molecules on the strands.

Now in the pictures of DNA or RNA, we have the sugars all aligned on the same side and the phosphates all aligned on the same opposite side as in this picture.
..S
......P
..S
......P
..S
......P

Now photons are perfect DNA and RNA, meaning that we can align the sugars and phosphates to alternate such as this picture.

.....P
..........S
.....P
S
.....P
.........S

And whereas the nucleotides are always bonded to the sugars we have two pictures.

N-S
..........P
N-S
..........P
N-S
..........P

And this.

........P
............S-N
........P
N-S
........P
............S-N
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-22 20:20:03 UTC
Archimedes Plutonium
2:11 PM (5 minutes ago)

to
Alright, as far as I know, there have been neutrinos found of the same high energy as high energy photons. As far as I know there have been neutrinos equivalent in energy to gamma photons. No borderline or boundary between neutrino and photon energies has ever been reported.

So, going on that assumption, I need find only some difference in character features or character traits. The best trait would be spin. That a photon goes clockwise always and a neutrino goes counterclockwise.

And since we have photons below the 17777Hz as longitudinal waves and the photons above 17777Hz as transverse waves, we have the same for neutrinos with the only difference being spin is opposite.

As for the production of neutrinos, in that they need to go inside of atoms, is explained just as the Rutherford gold leaf experiment with a alpha particle bouncing back to source. The photon, like the alpha particle encounters a moving muon through the proton torus and the bouncing off of the muon of either the alpha particle or of the photon becoming a neutrino, this bouncing off reverses the spin of the photon to become a neutrino.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-23 00:16:28 UTC
In my unification of 4 forces, I used a principle that of "most perfect particle" would be the unification force. Here I am in a far more difficult challenge of unification of electricity particles. My only principles so far that I can use is the principle of maximum electricity coupled with the principle that DNA mirror reflects what goes on in physics wave theory.

We see the sugar molecule fastened to the phosphate molecule for backbone just as nucleotide pairs fasten. So that we can say in one circumstance the nucleotides are the magnetic field with backbone the E-Field. Can we reverse that, where the nucleotides build and carry the sugar and phosphate molecules.

AP
Michael Moroney
2020-11-23 05:51:32 UTC
AP writes: This is getting better and better all the time. For in case of
The letters in "Archimedes Plutonium", rearranged, spell "Dream: Penis lit! Um, Ouch!!!".
Dan Christensen
2020-11-22 03:30:42 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Day of Reckoning for AP, King of Science, as to what is or is not a magnetic monopole-- photons, neutrinos, 0.5MeV particle.
The day of reckoning has come. I cannot wiggle out of this.
I must solve this puzzle in order to start the Junior High School TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS.
First, you will have to solve puzzles like the sine of 45 degrees in your goofy little system. (Hint: NOT 1) And T AND F (Hint: NOT T)

WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of AP's fake math and science

AP is a malicious troll who really, REALLY wants you to fail in school just like he must have so long ago (in the 60's?). Then he would like to recruit you to his sinister Atom God Cult of Failure. Think I'm making this up? IN HIS OWN WORDS:

AP's fake math that can only be designed to promote failure in schools:

“Primes do not exist, because the set they were borne from has no division.”
--June 29, 2020

“The last and largest finite number is 10^604.”
--June 3, 2015

“0 appears to be the last and largest finite number”
--June 9, 2015

“0/0 must be equal to 1.”
-- June 9, 2015

“0 is an infinite irrational number.”
--June 28, 2015

“No negative numbers exist.”
--December 22, 2018

“Rationals are not numbers.”
--May 18, 2019

“The value of sin(45 degrees) = 1.” (Actually, sin(45 degrees) = 0.707. tan(45 degrees) = 1.)
--May 31, 2019

AP deliberately and repeatedly presented the truth table for OR as the truth table for AND:

“New Logic
AND
T & T = T
T & F = T
F & T = T
F & F = F”
--November 9, 2019

According to AP's “chess board math,” an equilateral triangle is right-triangle.
--December 11, 2019

AP seeks aid of Russian agents to promote failure in schools:

"Please--Asking for help from Russia-- russian robots-- to create a new, true mathematics [sic]"
--November 9, 2017

And if that wasn't weird enough...

AP's sinister Atom God Cult

“The totality, everything that there is [the universe], is only 1 atom of plutonium [Pu]. There is nothing outside or beyond this one atom of plutonium.”
--April 4, 1994

“The Universe itself is one gigantic big atom.”
--November 14, 2019

“Since God-Pu is marching on.
Glory! Glory! Atom Plutonium!
Its truth is marching on.
It has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;
It is sifting out the hearts of people before its judgment seat;
Oh, be swift, my soul, to answer it; be jubilant, my feet!
Our God-Pu is marching on.”
--December 15, 2018 (Note: Pu is the atomic symbol for plutonium)

Dan

Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-22 04:13:51 UTC
Faceshitter Dan Christensen splat! Eric M. Friedlander, Robert L. Bryant, David Vogan, Ken Ribet, Jill Pipher, why not go for the truth of mathematics-- the slant cut in cone is a oval, never the ellipse.
Post by Dan Christensen
WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of
A victim of Univ. Western Ontario and arsewipe Dan Christensen with his 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, with his ellipse a conic when it never was (a ellipse is a cylinder section) and with the insane nutter with Univ Western Ontario never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

To measure how nutty insane Christensen and Univ Western are: just follow the nutter in this post exchange:

Post by Dan Christensen
PAGE58, 8-3, True Geometry / correcting axioms, 1by1 tool, angles of logarithmic spiral, conic sections unified regular polyhedra, Leaf-Triangle, Unit Basis Vector
The axioms that are in need of fixing is the axiom that between any two points lies a third new point.
The should be "between and any two DISTINCT points."
What a monsterous fool you are
OMG. You are serious. Stupid and proud of it.
And yet Mr Plutonium is right. Two points are distinct (else they would
be one) and it is not necessary to say so.
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-23 20:28:36 UTC
AP solves it, with just the one word in Old Physics-- "cubic".

Quoting the web---
Statistical Mechanics of Nonlinear Wave Equations (4): Cubic Schrόdinger
H.P. McKean
CIMS, NewYork University, 251 Mercer St.,NewYork City, Ny 10012,USA Received: 23 June 1993/in revised form: 24 May 1994
Abstract: The cubic Schrόdinger equation is considered on the circle, both in the de-focussing and the focussing case. The existence of the flow is proved together with the invariance of the appropriate Gibbsian measure, namely the petit canonical measure in the defocussing case and the micro-canonical measure in the focussing case.
--- end quote--

AP writes: did you ever wonder why so much of the solutions of Schrodinger and Dirac appear in "cubic form"? Did you ever wonder what "cubic" had to do with quantum mechanics? Probably 99% never wondered. As did I, until now.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-23 22:03:16 UTC
Yes, I am very happy, very happy, full of glee and celebration in the Plutonium household, today 23NOV2020, for I just discovered the unification of photons, neutrinos, magnetic monopoles, magnetic dipoles and the entire EM Spectrum.

If you thought unification of 4 forces was tough, well, that was a spot, on the spot discovery for AP in the 1990s. For the King of Science needed only logically think-- what is the most perfect particle in all of physics-- answer-- photon, that means all is electricity and magnetism.

Fast forward to 2020, and the KIng of Science needs to unify all of waves in physics. A million times more difficult of a problem than unifying 4 forces. Here the King of Science needed a month, not just a on-the-spot moment in a single day. No, it took the King a month to solve the riddle, and the riddle was solved from a fact of mathematics. The sphere of same diameter inside a cube of same size side is proportional to 52.3% versus 47.7%.

In the 4 forces, took just a nicely refined Logical mind, a rare commodity in science. In the unification of Physics-Waves required more than logic, a nice refined polished logical mind. In this case it required a collection of data, to piece all the data together to solve the problem.

Data:
1) Sphere inside Cube
2) AP's EM equations and especially the Capacitor Law
3) Light waves are closed loops
4) Proton is a torus tube with thrusting muon through to produce electricity
5) Electricity likes to stay on surface
6) Pair Production of positron versus monopole 0.5MeV
7) Capacitors are superconduction current
8) Neutrinos always match energy of photons
9) Atoms have no nucleus, but instead muons thrusting through proton toruses
10) DNA and RNA of biology mirror reflect all that is given in physics wave theory

These are just 10 of many many facts and data I wrestled with in the past month, but today, it all came together.

And, ironically, it was there all the time in Old Physics, in the Schrodinger and Dirac Equations of the heavy reliance on what they call the CUBIC SOLUTION.

The cubic solution confirms that the wave particles of photon, neutrino, magnetic monopole-dipole, electricity, E-field, B-field, are all part of the Capacitor Law of AP-EM Equations.

--- quoting 1st year calculus from Teaching True ---

Using the Product Rule which is (fgh)' = (f'gh + fg'h + fgh')

Capacitor Law V' = (i*B*L)' = i'*B*L + i*B'L + i*B*L'

AP

King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-24 02:10:40 UTC
The first time I learned of the Cubic Solutions of Shrodinger or Dirac Equations was in "The Elements Beyond Uranium" Seaborg, Loveland, 1990, pages 71-72.

Quoting page 71---
While the shapes of the s, p, and d orbitals, as calculated by nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, and their properties are familiar to most students in chemistry, the same cannot be said to be true about the nonrelativistic f orbitals. Therefore, we tabulate in Table 3.1 the angular portions of nonrelativistic f orbital wave functions and show their general shapes in Figure 3.5. The f orbitals are unusual in that no single set of wave functions is useful in all situations. In Table 3.1, we show two commonly used sets: (a) the general set (which simply arises from solving the Schrodinger equation for the hydrogen-like atom) and (b) the cubic set which is derived from three orbitals from the original general set (f_z^3, f_z(x^2-y^2) and f_xyz) and linear combinations of the remaining four orbitals. The cubic set has the desirable property of giving the crystal field splittings in cubic, tetrahedral, and octahedral symmetry (that is, symmetries involving triply degenerate orbitals) while the general set is most useful in treating tetragonal trigonal, and other symmetries involving doubly degenerate orbitals.

AP writes: I had emblazoned those passages and pictures in my mind ever since 1990 as I had discovered the Plutonium Atom Universe theory in 1990, and was eager to look at any pictures of the geometry of plutonium atom. What I never thought was going to be of huge importance between 1990 and 2020, is this concept of the Cubic set for mathematics. And here it is in 2020, where the cubic set allows me to unify all of wave theory of physics.
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Yes, I am very happy, very happy, full of glee and celebration in the Plutonium household, today 23NOV2020, for I just discovered the unification of photons, neutrinos, magnetic monopoles, magnetic dipoles and the entire EM Spectrum.
If you thought unification of 4 forces was tough, well, that was a spot, on the spot discovery for AP in the 1990s. For the King of Science needed only logically think-- what is the most perfect particle in all of physics-- answer-- photon, that means all is electricity and magnetism.
Fast forward to 2020, and the KIng of Science needs to unify all of waves in physics. A million times more difficult of a problem than unifying 4 forces. Here the King of Science needed a month, not just a on-the-spot moment in a single day. No, it took the King a month to solve the riddle, and the riddle was solved from a fact of mathematics. The sphere of same diameter inside a cube of same size side is proportional to 52.3% versus 47.7%.
In the 4 forces, took just a nicely refined Logical mind, a rare commodity in science. In the unification of Physics-Waves required more than logic, a nice refined polished logical mind. In this case it required a collection of data, to piece all the data together to solve the problem.
1) Sphere inside Cube
2) AP's EM equations and especially the Capacitor Law
3) Light waves are closed loops
4) Proton is a torus tube with thrusting muon through to produce electricity
5) Electricity likes to stay on surface
6) Pair Production of positron versus monopole 0.5MeV
7) Capacitors are superconduction current
8) Neutrinos always match energy of photons
9) Atoms have no nucleus, but instead muons thrusting through proton toruses
10) DNA and RNA of biology mirror reflect all that is given in physics wave theory
These are just 10 of many many facts and data I wrestled with in the past month, but today, it all came together.
And, ironically, it was there all the time in Old Physics, in the Schrodinger and Dirac Equations of the heavy reliance on what they call the CUBIC SOLUTION.
The cubic solution confirms that the wave particles of photon, neutrino, magnetic monopole-dipole, electricity, E-field, B-field, are all part of the Capacitor Law of AP-EM Equations.
--- quoting 1st year calculus from Teaching True ---
Using the Product Rule which is (fgh)' = (f'gh + fg'h + fgh')
Capacitor Law V' = (i*B*L)' = i'*B*L + i*B'L + i*B*L'
AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-26 19:55:57 UTC
Alright, let us examine the EM Spectrum.

At 17777 meter wavelength and 17777 cycles per second frequency we have the speed of light. This is radio wave frequency and what we have here is a transition from double transverse wave to that of longitudinal wave. Everything above 17777 is transverse, everything below 17777 is longitudinal.

Now we examine the transition from X-ray to gamma ray. We notice that at gamma ray 1.022MeV has the possibility of branching off into a 0.5MeV monopole with a 0.5MeV positron in Pair Production.

This translates into a wavelength of 1.2 *10^-12 meters with a frequency of 2.6*10^20 cycles per second.

Now we notice something specially happening at 17777 wavelength in that it is the numerical-square of the speed of light for 17777^2 is the speed of light.

Is there anything special with the gamma ray for pair-production? Of course there is.

If we look up the permittivity constant it is about 9*10^-12 F*m^-1.

While the permeability constant is 1.2*10^-6 H*m^-1

Notice that as we take the square root of permittivity we land upon 3 times the permeability constant numerical value.

So what we end up having at the X-ray to Gamma ray boundary is this

1.2*10^-12 (1.6*10^10) (1.6*10^10) = speed of light

At this juncture or boundary of X-ray to gamma ray is where photon energy can be transformed into rest mass of two particles of 0.5MeV.

So at this juncture, if the photons are packed tightly enough and when collided with a muon inside a proton torus of an atom, the photon breaks apart in Pair Production of a positron and monopole of electricity.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-27 01:24:00 UTC
Here we get a sense of an idea of where mass comes from a wave of light of high energy. It has to have a short wavelength and a large frequency, so as to form mass out of energy. And do not be surprised it involves phi, the golden ratio of 1.61... and permittivity and permeability.

Of course it is quantized at 0.5MeV or its full counterpart of 1MeV.

So why end up with rest mass appearance at 1 MeV, seems too fortunate that it is 1, why not some other number? Why does it have to be 1/840 for proton or 1/105 for muon? And the answer comes from the idea that a Gamma ray with square root of frequency matches 3 times the wavelength.

The Gamma ray has to have the energy and has to smash into a fast moving muon coming head-on inside a proton torus. The collision forces the breaking apart of the positron inside the photon cubic 47.7% with the monopole 52.3% remainder of the cubic photon.

Now some say that Pair Production also creates muon to antimuon and proton to antiproton. How is that possible? Well those high energies means even smaller wavelengths and higher frequencies which when inside a proton torus and a on coming muon collides and smashes the photon, you can end up with a additional muon and antimuon inside a proton torus or a additional proton and antiproton all inside the proton torus.

In Old Physics, Old Math, my mindset was inundated with the ideas of acceleration and derivative of speed, or the change of speed. In New Physics, I have to retrain myself to think of Newton's F= ma as that of Force equals mass times velocity times frequency. And to think of speed as wavelength times frequency more than distance divided by time. For most movement, motion by objects in the Universe is the motion of photons, and only occasionally do we have slow moving rest mass lumbering on by, for which we can say velocity is distance/time. Most objects need a wavelength times frequency analysis or as in force a wavelength times frequency times frequency.
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-27 06:05:36 UTC
So, the picture that is emerging here and answering my initial question-- what is electricity when we have photons, neutrinos, magnetic monopoles, magnetic dipoles, the 0.5MeV particle and the positron. When we have such a wide cast of particles what is electricity?

And the picture that is emerging is that electricity occurs when photons conglomerate into being a gamma ray and the gamma ray smashing head on into a muon inside a proton torus.

That would mean that photons superimpose or bunch up forming a high energy gamma ray that pair produces a 0.5MeV monopole with a positron, or, forms a 0.5MeV monopole with a neutrino. In this manner the neutrino and positron are the south pole of electricity while the 0.5MeV monopole is the north pole of electricity.

In this view, all photons and neutrinos bunch together and when they bunch into a gamma ray of 1.022MeV they have a chance of becoming electricity.

The sad trouble with this view, is that electricity happens only in a medium of atoms and not in empty space. Something like a Tesla generator out in the near vacuum of Space cannot occur. Suggesting that the empty Space can hold magnetism but not electricity. I hope that is not true, but need more time to think and reflect on it.

In this emerging picture we see electricity as being a breaking apart of a cube that is a gamma ray and holding inside the cube either a 0.5MeV north monopole plus a positron or a 0.5MeV north monopole and a antineutrino.

One good thing to say about this picture, though, is that it gives all these waves a practical job and function and task. Their task is to move around and grow into becoming a new hydrogen atom.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-27 16:46:13 UTC
So, when you have Newton's Law of F = ma changed into its correct form of F = mass times velocity times frequency F = mvf then you can correspond V = iBxE of voltage = current times magnetic field times electric field (vector product of course).

What this does is show us that voltage is a force.

And the picture emerging as to what electricity is, tells us that charge is removed out of physics. There is no charge on the proton nor the muon electron. The "charge" is a huge mistake of Old Physics. For the Proton is a torus chamber of a Faraday coil making electricity, and the muon is the bar magnet in Faraday law, not some silly goofball charge. Charge is for ignoramus physicists who should not be in physics, ever.

Almost the entire Standard Model-- that alltime idiocy theory of Old Physics is based on Algebras of symmetrical reverse particles. So that you have a particle of 0.5MeV and mistakenly call it the electron of atoms, then you say there is a reverse particle of a positron. Identical in every way to the 0.5MeV electron except for reverse signage and direction, but not mass. AP calls the Standard Model of Old Physics as mindless physics, where even robots, mindless robots can come up with a better theory.

When elementary physics particles have jobs, tasks, functions to do, such as the muon is Faraday law bar magnet and the proton is a Faraday coil, in that sense of a theory, you do not have the mindless endeavor of reverse everything with Algebra as the train of thought.

So in New Physics we ask what is the job, function, task of the photon, neutrino and the 0.5MeV particle? And the answer comes quickly in that the EM Spectrum is energy waves that goes into building more muons, and protons. Photons are waves that gain rest mass at gamma rays of 1.022 MeV and above. When you combine less energy photons into building photons of 1.022 MeV which collides with a muon inside a proton torus, you create the North magnetic monopole of a 0.5MeV and a South magnetic monopole of what Old Physics called a positron but is in fact a 0.5MeV neutrino. Before the collision of the 1.022 MeV gamma ray inside the proton torus, it was a magnetic dipole particle.

In this picture, then, we see all photons as magnetic dipoles until they split apart into a 0.5MeV monopole which is electricity.

Electricity is the push of the North pole 0.5MeV particle and the pull of the South pole 0.5MeV neutrino particle (positron in old literature).

When a neutron is isolated outside an atom it decays into a hydrogen atom of a proton with muon inside and also releases a North pole 0.5MeV monopole with a South pole 0.5MeV antineutrino.

In New Physics the Electromagnetic Spectrum are all magnetic dipoles that conglomerate together to form a high energy gamma ray which in the proper circumstances breaks apart into two North and South pole monopoles of electricity.

Throughout my lecturing, when I say gamma ray, I mean a closed loop circuit as all EM energy is a closed loop circuit. In my books, ray equals a closed loop circuit that looks almost like a straight line segment, an arrow, but is in fact a closed loop ring.

So, in New Physics we throw out the wastrel and ignorant Standard Model. And the picture that emerges for elementary particles of physics, is that every one of them has a job, a task, a function to perform in making new electricity so that atoms continue to grow bigger or grow new atoms of hydrogen or other atoms. Growth of atoms is what the elementary physics particles are doing.

And photons, neutrinos, monopoles and dipoles are the transportation and conglomeration system for atoms.

The idea that the positron = neutrino should have been apparent once Pair Production and Neutron Decay was analyzed. In Pair Production the high energy gamma ray splits into two 0.5MeV particles, one called a positron. In neutron decay the neutron breaks apart into a proton with its muon inside and then a 0.5MeV particle with a antineutrino. If someone in the 20th century had a sufficient logical brain, would have realized the antineutrino in neutron decay is the same as the positron in Pair Production.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-27 21:38:37 UTC
Alright, so, I am in the final home stretch of this marathon run. What is electricity particle and how does it move in copper wire?

The particle is a North magnetic monopole of 0.5MeV and is moving to catch up with its South magnetic monopole of 0.5MeV to form once again a photon cube containing both particles inside and as a magnetic dipole. The South monopole can be either what Old Physics called a positron or be a antineutrino.

The North monopole is a push in gravity and the South monopole is a pull in gravity.

Likewise, the North monopole is a push in Coulomb law and the South monopole is a pull in Coulomb law.

In this view of electricity, we see in a battery or capacitor or electric generator of Faraday law, we see electricity as North monopole particles made by the devices themselves, of the atoms in the battery or atoms in the capacitor or atoms in the electric generator making the monopoles via Faraday law of muon thrusting through proton torus, and these North monopoles waiting to be moved by completing the circuit, chasing after the South monopole.

What is electricity? It is all the EM waves spectrum compounded waves to reach 1.022MeV in energy. And how does electricity move or flow as current? It moves or flows as the North monopole chases the South monopole to become a dipole.

Let me think on this for not completely satisfied.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-27 22:48:26 UTC
Or the idea that the Capacitors of atoms like copper are storaging about 945 MeV from the protons-muons manufacturing the photons in Faraday law and storaging them in the Capacitor neutrons. So that when a bar magnet thrusts through a closed loop of copper, the lines of force are cut and eject a 0.5MeV North magnetic monopole into the copper wire, likewise the same bar magnet lines of force cut and ejects a South magnetic monopole of 0.5MeV and these two opposite poles monopoles seek each other to combine back into a neutral dipole. So the seeking of one another is the flow of electric current. An easy test of this idea is solid hydrogen and no electricity flow should occur since it has no neutrons.
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Alright, so, I am in the final home stretch of this marathon run. What is electricity particle and how does it move in copper wire?
The particle is a North magnetic monopole of 0.5MeV and is moving to catch up with its South magnetic monopole of 0.5MeV to form once again a photon cube containing both particles inside and as a magnetic dipole. The South monopole can be either what Old Physics called a positron or be a antineutrino.
The North monopole is a push in gravity and the South monopole is a pull in gravity.
Likewise, the North monopole is a push in Coulomb law and the South monopole is a pull in Coulomb law.
In this view of electricity, we see in a battery or capacitor or electric generator of Faraday law, we see electricity as North monopole particles made by the devices themselves, of the atoms in the battery or atoms in the capacitor or atoms in the electric generator making the monopoles via Faraday law of muon thrusting through proton torus, and these North monopoles waiting to be moved by completing the circuit, chasing after the South monopole.
What is electricity? It is all the EM waves spectrum compounded waves to reach 1.022MeV in energy. And how does electricity move or flow as current? It moves or flows as the North monopole chases the South monopole to become a dipole.
Let me think on this for not completely satisfied.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-28 02:20:19 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Or the idea that the Capacitors of atoms like copper are storaging about 945 MeV from the protons-muons manufacturing the photons in Faraday law and storaging them in the Capacitor neutrons. So that when a bar magnet thrusts through a closed loop of copper, the lines of force are cut and eject a 0.5MeV North magnetic monopole into the copper wire, likewise the same bar magnet lines of force cut and ejects a South magnetic monopole of 0.5MeV and these two opposite poles monopoles seek each other to combine back into a neutral dipole. So the seeking of one another is the flow of electric current. An easy test of this idea is solid hydrogen and no electricity flow should occur since it has no neutrons.
I had to make sure of that fact that helium can conduct electricity whereas hydrogen cannot because it has no neutrons as capacitor storage.

Quoting the web on attempts to get hydrogen to conduct current---
The team had sought simply to measure the less extreme electrical conductivity changes they expected. The researchers used a 1960s-era light-gas gun, originally employed in guided missile studies, to shoot an impactor plate into a sealed container containing a half-millimeter thick sample of liquid hydrogen. The liquid hydrogen was in contact with wires leading to a device measuring electrical resistance. The scientists found that, as pressure rose to 140 GPa (1,400,000 atm; 21,000,000 psi), the electronic energy band gap, a measure of electrical resistance, fell to almost zero. The band-gap of hydrogen in its uncompressed state is about 15 eV, making it an insulator but, as the pressure increases significantly, the band-gap gradually fell to 0.3 eV. Because the thermal energy of the fluid (the temperature became about 3,000 K or 2,730 °C due to compression of the sample) was above 0.3 eV, the hydrogen might be considered metallic.

Another Web quote, and hydrogen does not conduct---
Hydrogen is one of the best-studied elements in the Universe - and in its natural state, it's definitely not a metal. It's not shiny and it doesn't conduct electricity.
But back in 1935, researchers predicted that under certain high-pressure conditions, hydrogen could take on metallic properties.

Another Web quote on helium conduction of electricity---
Now take helium, for instance, a generally inert gas that do0esn't conduct electricity well. Chill it down to a few degrees Kelvin, and for lack of a better term the electrons don't stick. Now the helium is at a few degrees kelvin is a super-conductor, no electricalresistance.
--- end quoting ---

So the Wigner theory prediction of hydrogen electrical conduction is false. And the AP theory that conductivity of electrical current is due to possession of neutrons that easily give up some stored 0.5MeV North monopoles.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-28 05:40:04 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Or the idea that the Capacitors of atoms like copper are storaging about 945 MeV from the protons-muons manufacturing the photons in Faraday law and storaging them in the Capacitor neutrons. So that when a bar magnet thrusts through a closed loop of copper, the lines of force are cut and eject a 0.5MeV North magnetic monopole into the copper wire, likewise the same bar magnet lines of force cut and ejects a South magnetic monopole of 0.5MeV and these two opposite poles monopoles seek each other to combine back into a neutral dipole. So the seeking of one another is the flow of electric current. An easy test of this idea is solid hydrogen and no electricity flow should occur since it has no neutrons.
I had to make sure of that fact that helium can conduct electricity whereas hydrogen cannot because it has no neutrons as capacitor storage.
Quoting the web on attempts to get hydrogen to conduct current---
The team had sought simply to measure the less extreme electrical conductivity changes they expected. The researchers used a 1960s-era light-gas gun, originally employed in guided missile studies, to shoot an impactor plate into a sealed container containing a half-millimeter thick sample of liquid hydrogen. The liquid hydrogen was in contact with wires leading to a device measuring electrical resistance. The scientists found that, as pressure rose to 140 GPa (1,400,000 atm; 21,000,000 psi), the electronic energy band gap, a measure of electrical resistance, fell to almost zero. The band-gap of hydrogen in its uncompressed state is about 15 eV, making it an insulator but, as the pressure increases significantly, the band-gap gradually fell to 0.3 eV. Because the thermal energy of the fluid (the temperature became about 3,000 K or 2,730 °C due to compression of the sample) was above 0.3 eV, the hydrogen might be considered metallic.
Another Web quote, and hydrogen does not conduct---
Hydrogen is one of the best-studied elements in the Universe - and in its natural state, it's definitely not a metal. It's not shiny and it doesn't conduct electricity.
But back in 1935, researchers predicted that under certain high-pressure conditions, hydrogen could take on metallic properties.
Another Web quote on helium conduction of electricity---
Now take helium, for instance, a generally inert gas that do0esn't conduct electricity well. Chill it down to a few degrees Kelvin, and for lack of a better term the electrons don't stick. Now the helium is at a few degrees kelvin is a super-conductor, no electricalresistance.
--- end quoting ---
So the Wigner theory prediction of hydrogen electrical conduction is false. And the AP theory that conductivity of electrical current is due to possession of neutrons that easily give up some stored 0.5MeV North monopoles.
AP
Alright, I have this thing narrowed down, by thing I mean what is electricity and how does it flow as current. And the conclusion maybe a huge huge surprise to me and everyone else. The surprise is the job and task and function of Neutrons in atoms. For 4 years now I focused more than 90% on proton and muon and Faraday and Ampere law. Seldom did I talk about neutrons. But here neutrons come up in a huge huge way. I did talk of neutrons in atoms in the Atom Totality, saying that the huge voids of Space in Cosmology were Atomic Neutrons as skin and coating of the galaxies that formed cosmic rings of Cosmic Protons and the Cosmic Muon inside the 8 Proton Rings. And the voids were rather symmetrical, leading one to believe that Cosmic Neutrons were these voids that collect energy and storage energy such as cosmic gamma ray bursts.

But now, discussing hydrogen and why it is not electrical conductor yet helium is a electrical superconductor, and the only real important difference is that helium has neutrons yet hydrogen has none.

So, while we do the Faraday law of thrusting a bar magnet through a copper wire closed loop, we know copper atoms have many many neutrons, and so the bar magnet moves the North monopoles of 0.5MeV in one neutron capacitor throughout all the neutrons in all the copper atoms of that closed loop wire.

The cutting of lines of force of the bar magnet in the copper wire, those lines of magnetism go to moving the North magnetic monopole in neutron after neutron as the monopoles motion is electricity.

And this makes practical and logical and experimental sense because those elements with extra neutrons per protons are great electrical conductors-- silver, gold, copper, even aluminum. And we well know that the surface area of copper wire and many windings of copper wire contribute to greater electric flow.

So, I am glad to bring in Neutrons as perhaps the key structure that causes electricity to flow in wires.

Now as for gases like for Earth atmosphere and lightening storms, it would be the neutrons in gases such as O2, N2, etc.

But that leaves me with one big problem, the electricity flow of the Sun to make Earth move in its orbit by gravity. Here, my only possible link up is that electric flow can be in a magnetic field. So the Sun creates a Magnetic Field path (like the iron filings on top of a paper with bar magnet below) and Earth in a Sun magnetic path, and the electricity of the Sun pushes Earth in that magnetic field path but also pulls Earth in that magnetic field path.

Looking good, looking real good. And a theory of physics is always bad if you neglect major items such as neutrons.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-28 20:06:31 UTC
Electricity based upon the neutrons contained in atoms.

So, let us review the Table of Chemical Elements based on the number 6, not 8 for Lewis Structure energy.

So, I have two reasons to basis the true table on 6-- (a) math geometry has densest packing of 6 and (b) chemistry dissociation energy of CO and N2 is based on 6.

So, here is the start of New Chemistry's Table of Periodic Elements

H,  He,   Li,   Be,    B,     C
N,   O ,   F,    Ne,  Na,  Mg
Al,  Si,    P,      S,     Cl,   Ar
K,   Ca,  Sc,   Ti,      V,    Cr
Mn, Fe,  Co,   Ni,    Cu,  Zn
Ga,  Ge, As,   Se,   Br,    Kr
Rb,  Sr,   Y,     Zr,    Nb,  Mo
Tc,  Ru,  Rh,   Pd,  Ag,   Cd
In,   Sn,  Sb,   Te,   I ,     Xe
Cs,  Ba,  La,   Ce,  Pr,   Nd
Pm, Sm, Eu,   Gd, Tb,  Dy
Ho,   Er,   Tm, Yb,  Lu,  Hf
Ta,    W,   Re,   Os,  Ir,   Pt
Au,   Hg,  Tl,    Pb,  Bi,  Po
At,    Rn,   Fr,   Ra,  Ac, Th
Pa,    U,    Np,  Pu,  Am, Cm
Bk,   Cf,    99,  100, 101, 102
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-28 20:40:03 UTC
Now the Old Chemistry Periodic Table does put the three greatest conductors in the same column of Cu, Ag, Au with odd number protons. The New Table puts copper and silver where halogens like fluorine and chlorine are in Old Chemistry.

But, the telling features of copper and silver and gold is the excess of neutrons. And the excess of neutrons is the very fact of a lot of electricity. For example the two stable isotopes of copper are 63Cu at close to 69% and 65Cu at nearly 31% abundance to give us 2 neutrons 65-63 = 2, two neutrons you can say are electricity neutrons.

Same goes for silver 107Ag at almost 52% abundance with 109Ag at nearly 48% giving off 2 neutrons for electricity.

Compared to iron Fe which we can call both magnetic and electrical but not as good a electric conductor as copper or silver.

56Fe at nearly 92%, with 54Fe at 5% and 57Fe at 2% and a 58Fe at not quite 1%. The neutrons of iron, unlike copper and silver are more in favor of magnetism than in electricity exchange.

Now the neutrons of gold are 100% in 197Au but at such high atomic number, the abundance of neutrons has a different physical analysis. And it is the cause of why gold does not tarnish in chemical bonding as does copper tarnishes and also silver tarnishes so quick and easily.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-28 21:30:08 UTC
Neutrons of Atoms is the forming mechanism of electricity.

Now I am looking for a concept of NEUTRON EXCESS in the Periodic Table, of either New Chemistry or the Old Chemistry.
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Now the Old Chemistry Periodic Table does put the three greatest conductors in the same column of Cu, Ag, Au with odd number protons. The New Table puts copper and silver where halogens like fluorine and chlorine are in Old Chemistry.
But, the telling features of copper and silver and gold is the excess of neutrons. And the excess of neutrons is the very fact of a lot of electricity. For example the two stable isotopes of copper are 63Cu at close to 69% and 65Cu at nearly 31% abundance to give us 2 neutrons 65-63 = 2, two neutrons you can say are electricity neutrons.
Same goes for silver 107Ag at almost 52% abundance with 109Ag at nearly 48% giving off 2 neutrons for electricity.
Compared to iron Fe which we can call both magnetic and electrical but not as good a electric conductor as copper or silver.
56Fe at nearly 92%, with 54Fe at 5% and 57Fe at 2% and a 58Fe at not quite 1%. The neutrons of iron, unlike copper and silver are more in favor of magnetism than in electricity exchange.
Now the neutrons of gold are 100% in 197Au but at such high atomic number, the abundance of neutrons has a different physical analysis. And it is the cause of why gold does not tarnish in chemical bonding as does copper tarnishes and also silver tarnishes so quick and easily.
AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-29 01:03:31 UTC
I am rather surprised that copper is higher than gold and that beryllium and aluminum are so high.

But I maybe in trouble with Outer Space for neutrons are few and far in between, and what I need in Outer Space is the idea of magnetic lines of force can be conductors of electric current. Is that possible??? And here I maybe forced to think that Outer Space itself is full of electricity as the Cosmic Neutron is the emptiness of space.

AP
King of Science

Quoting the AngstromSciences web page on electrical conductivity---
Electrical ConductivityNameSymbol#5.0E-24 106/cm ΩSulfurS161.0E-17 106/cm ΩPhosphorusP158.0E-16 106/cm ΩIodineI531.0E-12 106/cm ΩSeleniumSe341.0E-12 106/cm ΩBoronB52.52E-12 106/cm ΩSiliconSi141.45E-8 106/cm ΩGermaniumGe322.0E-6 106/cm ΩTelluriumTe520.00061 106/cm ΩCarbonC60.00666 106/cm ΩPlutoniumPu940.00695 106/cm ΩManganeseMn250.00736 106/cm ΩGadoliniumGd640.00822 106/cm ΩNeptuniumNp930.00867 106/cm ΩBismuthBi830.00889 106/cm ΩTerbiumTb650.00956 106/cm ΩSamariumSm620.0104 106/cm ΩMercuryHg800.0108 106/cm ΩDysprosiumDy660.0112 106/cm ΩEuropiumEu630.0115 106/cm ΩCeriumCe580.0117 106/cm ΩErbiumEr680.0124 106/cm ΩHolmiumHo670.0126 106/cm ΩLanthanumLa570.0148 106/cm ΩPraseodymiumPr590.015 106/cm ΩThuliumTm690.0157 106/cm ΩNeodymiumNd600.0166 106/cm ΩYttriumY390.0177 106/cm ΩScandiumSc210.0185 106/cm ΩLutetiumLu710.0219 106/cm ΩPoloniumPo840.022 106/cm ΩAmericiumAm950.0234 106/cm ΩTitaniumTi220.0236 106/cm ΩZirconiumZr400.0288 106/cm ΩAntimonySb510.03 106/cm ΩFranciumFr870.03 106/cm ΩBariumBa560.0312 106/cm ΩHafniumHf720.0345 106/cm ΩArsenicAs330.0351 106/cm ΩYtterbiumYb700.038 106/cm ΩUraniumU920.0481 106/cm ΩLeadPb820.0489 106/cm ΩVanadiumV230.0489 106/cm ΩCesiumCs550.0529 106/cm ΩProtactiniumPa910.0542 106/cm ΩRheniumRe750.0617 106/cm ΩThalliumTl810.0653 106/cm ΩThoriumTh900.067 106/cm ΩTechnetiumTc430.0678 106/cm ΩGalliumGa310.0693 106/cm ΩNiobiumNb410.0761 106/cm ΩTantalumTa730.0762 106/cm ΩStrontiumSr380.0774 106/cm ΩChromiumCr240.0779 106/cm ΩRubidiumRb370.0917 106/cm ΩTinSn500.095 106/cm ΩPalladiumPd460.0966 106/cm ΩPlatinumPt780.0993 106/cm ΩIronFe260.108 106/cm ΩLithiumLi30.109 106/cm ΩOsmiumOs760.116 106/cm ΩIndiumIn490.137 106/cm ΩRutheniumRu440.138 106/cm ΩCadmiumCd480.139 106/cm ΩPotassiumK190.143 106/cm ΩNickelNi280.166 106/cm ΩZincZn300.172 106/cm ΩCobaltCo270.187 106/cm ΩMolybdenumMo420.189 106/cm ΩTungstenW740.197 106/cm ΩIridiumIr770.21 106/cm ΩSodiumNa110.211 106/cm ΩRhodiumRh450.226 106/cm ΩMagnesiumMg120.298 106/cm ΩCalciumCa20 0.313 106/cm ΩBerylliumBe4 0.377 106/cm ΩAluminumAl13 0.452 106/cm ΩGoldAu79 0.596 106/cm ΩCopperCu29 0.63 106/cm ΩSilverAg
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-29 04:58:22 UTC
Electric currents in outer space.

Quoting from Web---
Electric Currents in Geospace and Beyond, a new book just published by the American Geophysical Union, explores our most up-to-date understanding of electric currents in the solar system. Here the editors answer some questions about past and recent advances in this field.

What are the main characteristics of electric currents in near-Earth space?
In our homes and in cities, electric currents are guided along thin wires, but this is far from the case in outer space. Electric currents are spread out over a few hundreds of meters to tens of thousands of kilometers, and their cumulative magnitudes are much bigger than any currents on Earth. For example, the ring current, with a strength of 2–4 million Amperes (MA), flows in closed loops in an equatorial current sheet out to distances of 60,000 kilometers and merges into the magnetotail current on the nightside beyond this distance. The strength of the tail current exceeds 10 MA and is closed at the dawn and dusk flanks of the magnetotail by the Chapman‐Ferraro current system of the magnetopause. Field-aligned currents flow between the ionosphere and magnetosphere along the background magnetic field with magnitudes of 1-3 MA.
--- end quote ---

AP writes: Well if magnetic fields exist all across the Universe, then we deduce electric currents exist all across the Universe, simple as that, for that is the Maxwell unification of electricity with magnetism. But what I need specifically is the current that flows within the Magnetic Lines of Force such as the magnetic lines of force that is the Earth's orbit path. And the other planets orbit paths created from magnetism of the sun as specifically each magnetic path is injected with electric current from the sun have the electric current flow in outer-space. Looking at some of the diagrams of this book (too expensive to buy, make it paperback, Berkeley), suggests exactly that the outer space current aligns with the planetary orbit magnetic paths. This then deduces that gravity is the push and pull of electric current into planets following the magnetic lines of force of each planetary orbit path.

P.S. for the price of the Berkeley book above, you can buy almost a third of all the AP Kindle books (144 books now published).

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-29 05:24:29 UTC
Here is all I needed to know-- Current Sheets in the Solar System.

From that book Electric Currents in Geospace and Beyond, 2018 is Part III: Current Sheets

Current Sheets at the Giant Planets
by C. Arridge & C. Martin

AP writes: exactly what I need, for capacitors are sheets or plates, parallel plate capacitors.

This means Outer Space rather than being empty space is actually Cosmic Neutrons as full of electrical energy. Take a look at the Cosmic mapping of galaxies and notice the Voids. The voids are symmetrical, just the same amount on top as bottom and left to right, after you factor in that the Doppler redshift is all screwed up on distance.

So the Voids in astronomy are Cosmic Neutrons. The galaxies are in a geometrical ring pattern of 8 rings with the Cosmic Muon horizontal to the Cosmic Proton 8 rings.

The Voids are Parallel Plate Capacitors of Cosmic Neutrons. This is why we see those huge and frighting Cosmic Gamma Ray bursts, for they are electricity from one Cosmic Neutron to another Cosmic Neutron.

This is what I need to finish off my analysis of magnetic monopole and electricity. The electric current is the motion of 0.5MeV particles obtained by the accumulation of eV photons. Electricity is the motion of these 0.5MeV particles from one neutron to another neutron of copper atoms in a copper wire closed loop.

And this gives me electric current in Outer Space, which gives me the desire of a spaceship that flys on electric current in Outer Space. We can build spacecraft that fly from Earth's ground to the Space Station and onwards to any planet we want. In the news recently was a German airplane called Lilium which, when refitted to AP's design plan, can fly to the ISS, International Space Station.

AP
King of Science
bwr fml
2020-11-29 17:25:25 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Here is all I needed to know-- Current Sheets in the Solar System.
From that book Electric Currents in Geospace and Beyond, 2018 is Part III: Current Sheets
Current Sheets at the Giant Planets
by C. Arridge & C. Martin
AP writes: exactly what I need, for capacitors are sheets or plates, parallel plate capacitors.
This means Outer Space rather than being empty space is actually Cosmic Neutrons as full of electrical energy. Take a look at the Cosmic mapping of galaxies and notice the Voids. The voids are symmetrical, just the same amount on top as bottom and left to right, after you factor in that the Doppler redshift is all screwed up on distance.
So the Voids in astronomy are Cosmic Neutrons. The galaxies are in a geometrical ring pattern of 8 rings with the Cosmic Muon horizontal to the Cosmic Proton 8 rings.
The Voids are Parallel Plate Capacitors of Cosmic Neutrons. This is why we see those huge and frighting Cosmic Gamma Ray bursts, for they are electricity from one Cosmic Neutron to another Cosmic Neutron.
This is what I need to finish off my analysis of magnetic monopole and electricity. The electric current is the motion of 0.5MeV particles obtained by the accumulation of eV photons. Electricity is the motion of these 0.5MeV particles from one neutron to another neutron of copper atoms in a copper wire closed loop.
And now you just have to do a teeny tiny itsy bitsy bit of actual science, an actual experiment to prove or disprove all the crank snot you have spewed out your screech hole for decades.
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
And this gives me electric current in Outer Space, which gives me the desire of a spaceship that flys on electric current in Outer Space. We can build spacecraft that fly from Earth's ground to the Space Station and onwards to any planet we want. In the news recently was a German airplane called Lilium which, when refitted to AP's design plan, can fly to the ISS, International Space Station.
So BUY two thin plates of beryllium and a lithium battery, connect them up and actually DEMONSTRATE whether your delusions are real or just a product of your mental illness.
Actually DEMONSTRATE your capacitor flies off into space, or even just lifts itself off the table (without you throwing it up in the air).
You don't need the excuse that nobody is going to redesign their aircraft. You don't need the excuse of your lacking motors.
You just need to DO THE EXPERIMENT to actually test your delusion. That is what the king of science does, TEST your claim.
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP
Gay Drag Queen of Delusional PseudoScience
bwr fml
2020-11-29 18:14:57 UTC
Post by bwr fml
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
This is what I need to finish off my analysis of magnetic monopole and electricity. The electric current is the motion of 0.5MeV particles obtained by the accumulation of eV photons. Electricity is the motion of these 0.5MeV particles from one neutron to another neutron of copper atoms in a copper wire closed loop.
And now you just have to do a teeny tiny itsy bitsy bit of actual science, an actual experiment to prove or disprove all the crank snot you have spewed out your screech hole for decades.
So BUY two thin plates of beryllium and a lithium battery, connect them up and actually DEMONSTRATE whether your delusions are real or just a product of your mental illness.
Actually DEMONSTRATE your capacitor flies off into space, or even just lifts itself off the table (without you throwing it up in the air).
While you are waiting on the excuse of not having any beryllium cut two squares of aluminum foil off the roll, put a sheet of paper between those, connect up a lithium battery to your capacitor

and actually demonstrate that it flies off into space, or at least flies off the table without you throwing it
Post by bwr fml
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP
Gay Drag Queen of Delusional PseudoScience
Come on mentally ill crank, quit screaming your delusions and demonstrate they actually work exactly as you describe.
And do this before you have fooled yourself into believing this and won't be able to give it up, no matter how crank wrong you are.
That is what a king of science would do, actually DO the experiment, publish the results and admit that is reality.
Then you can actually DO the experiment for each of your hundreds of "books" and update each one to show what really actually happened when you quit imagining and did the experiment.

And when you test your capacitor and it doesn't fly to the space station... you owe me that 400 thousand dollars
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-29 20:30:17 UTC
Alright, I am in a good position here, where I let the facts and data determine the theory.

We all know, even Old Chemistry and Old Physics that much of chemical bonding of elements is the covalent or ionic or metallic and that just UV energy breaks apart the bonding. That bonding involves the 0.5MeV particle with UV energies dissociating the weak bonds.

UV 10^-7m wavelength 10 cycles sec frequency
X-rays between UV and gamma rays
Gamma rays starting at 10^-12 m wavelength and 10^20 cycles sec frequency

So we picture a cube box as the faces as parallel plate capacitors of neutrons. We picture the interior of the box as residing a proton torus coil with a muon inside the proton torus doing the Faraday law.

From here we can take two atoms of copper as cube boxes and stack them forming a rectangular box or we can increase the size of the cube box 2 times larger. Our outer box is always with 6 faces for the Lewis 6 Structure. And the electricity that is the chemical bond is on the outside faces.

What happens to the proton toruses inside the increasing box? They can either form larger toruses and remain a cubic box or remain small toruses separated but chemically bonded by the neutrons outer faces.

AP
King of Science
bwr fml
2020-11-28 22:53:00 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
But now, discussing hydrogen and why it is not electrical conductor yet helium is a electrical superconductor, and the only real important difference is that helium has neutrons yet hydrogen has none.
AP
Gay Drag Queen of Dementia Pseudoscience
You can buy little glass tubes filled with hydrogen and with electrodes on both ends.
You can attach a high voltage source across those electrodes.
You can then see the bright light emitted by the hydrogen and measure the current flowing.

All those were the essential steps that anyone who does actual real science does.
None of those were the essential steps that the Gay Drag Queen of Dementia Pseudoscience ever does.

Let's bet serious money whether that actually happens when we try it like thousands have done before.
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-29 23:41:03 UTC
Alright, I finally have the magnetic monopole understanding and it comes from the neutrons of atoms. For 4 years now I neglected the neutron focussing my attention on the proton and muon doing Faraday Law. The function of neutrons in Old Physics, Old Chemistry was to help hold together a nucleus of protons and neutrons bunched together. A silly and most stupid idea, and they never even provided a mechanism of how a neutron holds together protons. In this mindless idea of Old Physics, where particles have only "charge" and travel time of the electron, none performing the laws of Maxwell equations. In New Physics every particle has a job and doing a law of Maxwell equations. There, is not that just commonsense-- you have Maxwell Equations, why in hell would you not assign subatomic particles as what the Maxwell Equations are all about.
So the function of neutrons is to storage the electricity that the proton and muon produce. And it is this stored electricity that is evident in the Faraday law when you plunge or thrust a bar magnet through a closed loop of copper wire. The magnetic lines of force are cut during the plunge and that energy goes to moving a 0.5MeV particle stored in one neutron of a copper atom and sends that 0.5MeV magnetic monopole moving on down to the next neutron of the next copper atom in the closed loop of copper wire.
As for Outer Space where no copper wire is evident yet outer space is full of electricity and magnetism, especially "sheets of electricity". Here we have to recognize what I call Cosmic Neutrons, where space itself is a capacitor storing up electricity.
It is well known that every point in Outer Space has magnetism, hence, every point in Outer Space has electricity for magnetism is electricity. Well, I better be awfully careful here because magnetism does not equal electricity but is the duality of one another. So that you cannot have one without the other being present also.
And now I can finish book volume 2 for Junior High School Teaching True Physics.
I want to go into December having finished my 145th book.
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-11-30 19:58:03 UTC
AP's physics of neutrons as capacitors easily solves the Neutron Anomaly. The neutrons themselves are storage boxs of the 0.5MeV monopole, the unit of electricity, so that when researchers fire neutrons means they add on additional monopoles to a existing given neutron and thus it takes a bit more time approx 8 seconds more time to shed the add-ons of monopoles for which the neutrons in the bottle were not given add-on monopoles before measuring.

Quoting PhysicsWorld---

To measure the average neutron lifetime precisely, physicists employ two basic techniques. One is to house neutrons within a container, known as a bottle, and simply count how many of them remain after a fixed interval of time. The other approach is to fire a neutron beam with a known intensity through an electromagnetic trap and measure how many protons emerge in a given time.

Growing disagreement
Ongoing since the early 1990s, the two types of experiment yield results that remain at odds with one other. While the bottle method tells us that neutrons decay after about 880 s on average, the beam tests put the figure around eight seconds higher – at 888 s. The difference is significant because it can’t be accounted for through either statistical or known systematic uncertainties. Until 2013, the discrepancy amounted to 2.9σ. Then, following improvements to the world’s leading beam experiment, the mismatch hardened – rising to 3.8σ.
--- end quote ---

AP writes, now according to my sigma error calculation that is 888/880 = 0.9% sigma error well under 1%, so see no reason to gripe. Furthermore, if we check out the modern day mass of the neutron as 940MeV while AP theory places it as 840MeV + 105MeV = proton + muon = 945MeV for a sigma error of 945/940 = 0.5% sigma error. About half the error of time rate of decay. Are the two related? Probably yes.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-01 07:57:52 UTC
Archimedes Plutonium
1:56 AM (now)

to
Alright, I am not finished with this thread as of yet, even though I have started writing TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, Senior High School.

A topic on my mind is the 0.5MeV monopole as hard-X-rays. The idea again is that rest mass is the accumulation of photons of eV until that accumulation reaches 0.5MeV and thus is borne or created rest mass. Now the rest-mass of 0.5MeV can also come from the collision inside a proton torus with a gamma ray photon of 1.022MeV resulting in a North 0.5MeV monopole and a South 0.5MeV monopole (commonly called the positron).

So the border between hard Xrays and Gamma rays is 1.022MeV but before that border is reached we have another border between soft Xrays and that of hard Xrays with a frequency and wavelength that yields 0.5MeV energy.

In Old Physics, we thought of neutrons as crowded around protons helping them stay together in a dense nucleus. In New Physics we see the neutron forming skin and coating around proton toruses with muons inside the torus producing electricity via Faraday law. That newly made electricity goes to filling neutrons as capacitors until they reach 945 MeV and thus forming a new proton+muon torus.

So that we have two borderlines in the high energy EM spectrum, the hard-X-rays and the start of Gamma rays.

We see electricity current as that of monopoles moving from one neutron capacitor to the next nearby neutron capacitor.

This would very much suggest that electricity is very similar to hard X-rays.

Do we have any evidence of that?

Well the very production of X-rays comes from electricity, Wikipedia-- "Whenever charged particles (electrons or ions) of sufficient energy hit a material, X-rays are produced.

Now, let us translate that into true physics, not fake physics and that would read "Whenever monopoles of sufficient energy hit a material, X-rays are produced."

By material we can say a neutron, so when a monopole as electricity is moving and hits into a nearby neutron, that neutron emits another monopole in turn, on down the circuit of copper wire.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-02 02:27:02 UTC
This may leave me with far more problems than answers, for it suggests a photon Xray of 0.5MeV energy and a magnetic monopole of Xray with 0.5MeV energy.

It also suggests that all gamma-rays above 1.022MeV have rest-mass.

There would be a nice experiment to verify this, by sending three EM waves into space-- Visible, X-ray, gamma rays. If the X-ray and gamma ray had internal rest mass, they would not be able to reach distant spot that the Visible or even Radio wave reaches. The internal rest mass of the hard-Xray, the gamma ray would make them short distance waves.

Or, a very different solution altogether is to say that Old Physics completely screwed up on saying the 0.5MeV particle was rest-mass when it fact it was just energy, and not rest-mass.

And if I were a betting man, I would bet the 0.5MeV was never rest mass but just energy.

AP
King of Science
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Alright, I am not finished with this thread as of yet, even though I have started writing TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, Senior High School.
A topic on my mind is the 0.5MeV monopole as hard-X-rays. The idea again is that rest mass is the accumulation of photons of eV until that accumulation reaches 0.5MeV and thus is borne or created rest mass. Now the rest-mass of 0.5MeV can also come from the collision inside a proton torus with a gamma ray photon of 1.022MeV resulting in a North 0.5MeV monopole and a South 0.5MeV monopole (commonly called the positron).
So the border between hard Xrays and Gamma rays is 1.022MeV but before that border is reached we have another border between soft Xrays and that of hard Xrays with a frequency and wavelength that yields 0.5MeV energy.
In Old Physics, we thought of neutrons as crowded around protons helping them stay together in a dense nucleus. In New Physics we see the neutron forming skin and coating around proton toruses with muons inside the torus producing electricity via Faraday law. That newly made electricity goes to filling neutrons as capacitors until they reach 945 MeV and thus forming a new proton+muon torus.
So that we have two borderlines in the high energy EM spectrum, the hard-X-rays and the start of Gamma rays.
We see electricity current as that of monopoles moving from one neutron capacitor to the next nearby neutron capacitor.
This would very much suggest that electricity is very similar to hard X-rays.
Do we have any evidence of that?
Well the very production of X-rays comes from electricity, Wikipedia-- "Whenever charged particles (electrons or ions) of sufficient energy hit a material, X-rays are produced.
Now, let us translate that into true physics, not fake physics and that would read "Whenever monopoles of sufficient energy hit a material, X-rays are produced."
By material we can say a neutron, so when a monopole as electricity is moving and hits into a nearby neutron, that neutron emits another monopole in turn, on down the circuit of copper wire.
AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-02 02:41:15 UTC
Yes, come to think of it, we cannot measure the Lines of Force of a Bar Magnet, no matter how strong, for rest-mass of those Lines of Force. In other words, Old Physics just made a huge error in thinking. They measured energy of 0.5MeV of the tiny particle they called the electron, but which is really Dirac's Magnetic Monopole. And we cannot have rest mass for monopoles if we have no rest mass for lines of force of a dipole magnet.

So here I need to go back and look at how the 0.5MeV was measured, for it is just energy, not rest mass of particle. That would make things so much more simple and easy in Physics for the first rest mass particle is the muon, not that 0.5MeV particle.
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
This may leave me with far more problems than answers, for it suggests a photon Xray of 0.5MeV energy and a magnetic monopole of Xray with 0.5MeV energy.
It also suggests that all gamma-rays above 1.022MeV have rest-mass.
There would be a nice experiment to verify this, by sending three EM waves into space-- Visible, X-ray, gamma rays. If the X-ray and gamma ray had internal rest mass, they would not be able to reach distant spot that the Visible or even Radio wave reaches. The internal rest mass of the hard-Xray, the gamma ray would make them short distance waves.
Or, a very different solution altogether is to say that Old Physics completely screwed up on saying the 0.5MeV particle was rest-mass when it fact it was just energy, and not rest-mass.
And if I were a betting man, I would bet the 0.5MeV was never rest mass but just energy.
AP
King of Science
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Alright, I am not finished with this thread as of yet, even though I have started writing TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, Senior High School.
A topic on my mind is the 0.5MeV monopole as hard-X-rays. The idea again is that rest mass is the accumulation of photons of eV until that accumulation reaches 0.5MeV and thus is borne or created rest mass. Now the rest-mass of 0.5MeV can also come from the collision inside a proton torus with a gamma ray photon of 1.022MeV resulting in a North 0.5MeV monopole and a South 0.5MeV monopole (commonly called the positron).
So the border between hard Xrays and Gamma rays is 1.022MeV but before that border is reached we have another border between soft Xrays and that of hard Xrays with a frequency and wavelength that yields 0.5MeV energy.
In Old Physics, we thought of neutrons as crowded around protons helping them stay together in a dense nucleus. In New Physics we see the neutron forming skin and coating around proton toruses with muons inside the torus producing electricity via Faraday law. That newly made electricity goes to filling neutrons as capacitors until they reach 945 MeV and thus forming a new proton+muon torus.
So that we have two borderlines in the high energy EM spectrum, the hard-X-rays and the start of Gamma rays.
We see electricity current as that of monopoles moving from one neutron capacitor to the next nearby neutron capacitor.
This would very much suggest that electricity is very similar to hard X-rays.
Do we have any evidence of that?
Well the very production of X-rays comes from electricity, Wikipedia-- "Whenever charged particles (electrons or ions) of sufficient energy hit a material, X-rays are produced.
Now, let us translate that into true physics, not fake physics and that would read "Whenever monopoles of sufficient energy hit a material, X-rays are produced."
By material we can say a neutron, so when a monopole as electricity is moving and hits into a nearby neutron, that neutron emits another monopole in turn, on down the circuit of copper wire.
AP
King of Science
Michael Moroney
2020-12-02 03:06:35 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Yes, come to think of it, we cannot measure
"We", Stupid Plutonium?
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
In other words, Old Physics just made a huge error in thinking. They measured
energy of 0.5MeV of the tiny particle they called the electron, but which is
really Dirac's Magnetic Monopole.
So here I need to go back and look at how the 0.5MeV was measured, for it
is just energy, not rest mass of particle.
I measured the mass of the electron in high school physics. Do you want to
know how we did it?
bwr fml
2020-12-02 04:13:39 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
And if I were a betting man, I would bet the 0.5MeV was never rest mass but just energy.
Let me guess. You just lost your \$400,000 bet on your capacitor flying to the space station
or even just flying around the room under it's own power and, showing unimaginable restraint
on your part, you don't want to bet another \$400,000.

Pay up on the \$400,000 bet you lost to me.

Then we can talk about a half million dollar bet on whether your particle has rest mass or not.
Just think, you can win all you lost back on one more bet, or maybe lose everything you have.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP
Gay drag queen of dementia
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-02 06:29:22 UTC
If I am going to be successful in dismissing rest mass for the 0.5MeV particles, I have to reconcile that with the fact that muon and antimuon and proton and antiproton have been observed in pair production.

So here we have the idea of no rest mass photons alternating between rest mass particles in what is called Pair Production and Pair Annihilation.

Now the Occam's Razor solution would be to say photons, no matter how energetic, never contain rest mass particles and that the 1.022 MeV is all pure energy and the 0.5MeV particle is again all pure energy, where one is a North pole the other -- positron-- is South pole.

One piece of evidence in favor of this claim is the mechanics of what is called the positronium which acts like a 1/2 hydrogen atom. This would be the behavior of "pure energy" not particles of rest-mass.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-02 07:04:18 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Here is all I needed to know-- Current Sheets in the Solar System.
From that book Electric Currents in Geospace and Beyond, 2018 is Part III: Current Sheets
Current Sheets at the Giant Planets
by C. Arridge & C. Martin
Alright, I broke down and bought this book for nearly \$200. my second most expensive book bought. But knowledge and wisdom are more important than money, provided you have the money. And this book comes at an opportune time in my research. If I were not to be writing TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, I would not have bought it.

And the "electrical universe" is perhaps one of the most important and most neglected subjects of physics, so it is nice to see a group of people assembling that part of physics.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-02 07:18:53 UTC
I find myself in a lucky position of research. It has happened before, but I lost memory of the situation at hand in that past time. What I am speaking of, is I have two alternative explanations, and whichever one wins, I win also. I cannot go wrong.
For example, if Pair Production is "pure energy" and no rest mass particles, means I win as far as no longer having to explain magnetic monopoles as rest mass particles.
On the other hand, if Pair Production is truly rest mass particles, then I explain how energy turns into rest mass.
No matter which one is true, I come out the end as a winner on one front.
And the above makes me think there is a third alternative in these musings. Consider if the Pair Production is just pure energy and no rest mass inside the photon-- waiting to come out. Then we can have a universe where photons mimic or imitate rest mass particles but are not rest-mass particles. So the positron is just a pure energy wave, not a particle, that resembles the 0.5MeV particle with reverse signage. And the antiproton is a pure energy wave, not a particle that resembles the opposite of a real rest mass proton. Keeping in mind of course, the real proton is only 840MeV with a muon stuck inside.
And here is a very much theoretical hurdle to overcome for Old Physics. For the real proton is only 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law. So what is a antiproton from Pair Production? Is it going to have a antimuon stuck inside doing the Faraday Law?
Once we get down to penetrating questions like these, because we will never give up on the idea that the proton+ muon are doing the Faraday law. And so in Pair Production, that certainly is not a antiproton with antimuon stuck inside doing a anti-Faraday law whatever.
Again, what this suggests is that in Pair Production -- only pure energy is involved and that pure energy has resemblance to muon with antimuon and proton with antiproton, but they are not muon to antimuon nor proton to antiproton. They are pure energy that resemble those particles.
So why would Nature need copy resemblance?
So, in this resemblance particle of the muon and antimuon and proton and antiproton and 0.5MeV to positron, what say we, that in the Pair Production the photon which is a Double Transverse Wave has 2 E-fields and 2 B-fields is stripped of its E field +B field that makes up the one particle and the other stripped E plus B field makes up the other particle, the proton and antiproton. And that these single Transverse Waves resembles the proton and the other resembles the antiproton. To confirm this notion, we need merely watch at what velocities these particles emerge from the splitting. Are they going very fast?

So that Pair Production is the physics of splitting in half down the axis of the wave into Singlet Transverse Waves.

And why they take on a resemblance to muon and antimuon or proton and antiproton is baffling.

AP
bwr fml
2020-12-02 17:15:41 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
I find myself in a lucky position of research. It has happened before, but I lost memory of the situation at hand in that past time. What I am speaking of, is I have two alternative explanations, and whichever one wins, I win also. I cannot go wrong.
Let's see how real actual science is done.

1. Look at some claim that has had experiments done by dozens or hundreds or thousands of people with real actual instruments and real actual measurements.

2. Devise an even better experiment with more precise instruments and better measurements.

3. Show that experimental design to others to verify it is correct and to find ways to make it even better.

4. Actually buy the instruments and equipment.

5. Actually do the experiment and make the measurements (and find that again everyone agrees with the same result)

Let's see how the gay drag queen of dementia pseudoscience is done.

1. Pick any claim that has had experiments done by dozens or hundreds or thousands of people with real actual instruments and real actual measurements.

2. Make up some imaginary crank snot that is different from what everyone else has measured, almost always nothing more than archimedian numerology masturbating with numbers.

3. Blow the crank snot at sci.math and sci.physics claiming an astonishing discovery while frantically congratulating herself for her imaginary claims.

So which one of those qualifies for the king of science?
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
And why they take on a resemblance to muon and antimuon or proton and antiproton is baffling.
Astonish the world Archie. Do one actual real experiment with real instruments and real measurements and real results.

Pick any one of the hundreds or thousands of delusional claims where you can actually buy the instruments and do the experiment and make the measurements.

Pick an easy one, something that you can actually correctly measure something.

Otherwise you have hundreds or thousands of astonishing claims and exactly ZERO of those have had any actual science done to test and refute your delusion.

Some people would actually faint, a few might even die, if they saw real evidence that you had for the first time done one actual bit of science.
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP gay drag queen of dementia pseudoscience
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-02 20:54:53 UTC
Pair Production solved Re: AP's physics of neutrons as capacitors easily solves the Neutron Anomaly Re: Neutrons of Atoms forms electricity.

This is working out to be a beautiful resolution of Pair Production.

A major problem of physics or any science is to think logically over the results and data of experiments. No good in observing a experiment when afterwards you mangle and mess-up the data in some silly and stupid mechanism, or theory accounting of what happened.

In the case of Pair Production with 1933 and Blackett and Occhialini of cloud chamber photographs of 0.5MeV with positron Pair Production. I am using as source, that of Wehr, Richards, Adair, 4th edition, PHYSICS OF THE ATOM, 1984. Anderson experimentally observes a particle he calls the positron, in 1932.

So, well, tough times for people without a logical acumen to correctly interpret what the hell they saw, truthfully.

Could Dirac, Anderson, Blackett & Occhialini really given the correct picture of what they observed? Well, yes, if they had spent years just thinking logically of what they observed in those experiments, hopefully, coming to realize that a Photon or Light Wave is not a open ended ray, a arrow. No, a light wave is a closed loop. This was the challenge. Could anyone in 20th century physics have ever realized that light was a closed loop, just as electricity requires out of necessity a closed loop. Could anyone in the 20th century have realized that Special Relativity consequence is essentially the fact that light is a closed loop wave. Hard, but not impossible.

Because what they observed was not energetic photons splitting apart and forming two different particles of rest mass, but rather was simply the fact that LIGHT WAVES are closed loops. If you block a Light wave that is energetic, what the blockage does is send two wavelets in opposite direction along that very same closed loop. And this is not a production of two new particles of rest mass. You are just dividing in half the incoming Light Wave.

Quoting Physics of the Atom, page 190--
Positronium is a non-nuclear "element" with an average existence of less than 10^-7 seconds. Despite its short life, its spectrum has been measured.

AP writes: Although it would have taken a large logical mind to see that Pair Production of muon with antimuon and then of proton with antiproton, to see that the phenomenon was not producing new independent particles but rather was merely the bifurcation of the photon wave of its 4 vectors, 2 E-fields and 2 B-field and then sending them in opposite direction from point of impact.

Even (if AP was living) and at his prime in the 1930s would not have logically seen the correct answer. Not until 2016-2017 would AP have seen the flaw in Dirac, Anderson, Blackett. For the flaw is easily seen when we realize the proton is a torus of 840MeV with the muon inside doing the Faraday Law.

So, after 2017 if anyone still believes the Pair Production is producing new independent particles out of a gamma ray is a fool of physics and should not be in physics at all. Because when you see the proton and muon and neutron as having internal structure and a job and a task and a function to fulfill, you can no longer argue that a gamma ray can pair produce a muon and antimuon or a proton and antiproton. For that idiocy would have to explain how a Pair Production of a proton has its muon inside and doing a Faraday law whilst the antiproton is doing the hypocritical ad hoc antiFaraday law.

Resolution: Pair Production was when physicists were not yet educated enough to know that the Light Wave is a closed loop, and if it is blocked or collides with a muon inside a proton torus, that Light Wave can have one half of its closed loop be a energy of 1/2 the original closed loop. In Pair Production, you are not observing a proton with antiproton, no, you are observing the original light wave being separated of its closed loop into two halves that thence stream down that same original closed loop.

Same thing with the Pair Production of positron. A incoming gamma ray of 1.022MeV which is a closed loop , a closed loop ray, much like what a electrical extension cord is a closed loop ray, impacts with a muon in a collision inside a proton torus, and this impact causes 1/2 of the energy 0.51MeV to go in one direction of the closed loop ray and the other half 0.51MeV to go in opposite direction. In other words, one half is a North Magnetic Monopole and the other half is a South Magnetic Monopole.

If AP is correct on this Pair Production, means that every rest mass particle of baryons and mesons can be bifurcated in energy in a Pair Production. Not to say the Pair Production produced rest mass particles, no, but to say that the energy was divided in half of its CLOSED LOOP CIRCUIT.

And, well, even UV light or Visible light or Infrared waves can be bifurcated sending 1/2 the energy in one direction of the closed loop wave and the other 1/2 in the opposite direction. So we are not just stuck with rest mass particles but all EM waves can be bifurcated, perhaps not the radio longitudinal waves.

No, AP could not have figured this out without knowing that protons and muons and neutrons have internal structure and jobs and tasks to perform.

Pair Production is a fallacy of physics, for it is not a production of rest mass particles but merely the noting that you can divide a Light Wave into two magnetic monopoles of equal energy.

AP
King of Science
Michael Moroney
2020-12-02 21:20:51 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Pair Production solved Re: AP's physics of neutrons as capacitors easily so
[babble babble nonsense nonsense]

The letters in "Archimedes Plutonium", rearranged, spell "Tumid Camel Penis Hour".
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-03 02:33:19 UTC
And Pair Production was logically untenable from the very first of its annoucement in 1930s. To think that a photon has rest mass particles inside itself, when as a whole, the photon is itself non-rest-mass.

Certainly, no doubt, we were seeing some 1/2 of the gamma ray fly off in one direction and the other 1/2 in the opposite direction. But who would have thought that the original photon was a closed loop ray of Light and we were seeing the 1/2 as 1/2 of the closed loop and the other 1/2 as the other 1/2 of the closed loop.

What finally made me see the "light of day" was the nonsense of thinking that a gamma ray photon producing proton and antiproton. In the Old Physics, such trash would make sense if you thought of the proton and electron as nothing but comical round balls with no structure, no job, no function. But once you realize the proton is a torus of 8 rings as a Faraday Coil with the muon stuck inside as bar magnet plunging through the proton torus. It is that very moment you realize Pair Production is folly. For you cannot have a photon gamma ray splitting into a proton doing Faraday law with muon inside and a antiproton of opposite the proton.

This eases my burden of understanding and explaining the Dirac magnetic monopole and the monopole as electricity.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-04 06:11:13 UTC
So why was there not anyone sharp enough in mind to question the foolishness of Pair Production and see it for what it really was-- all light waves are closed loops and so in a collision with a muon in a proton torus, the gamma ray is broken into two opposing wavelets, instead of being one wave, the one wave becomes two wavelets. And we should see this occuring with other EM spectrum waves.

But the logic was there all along, for you cannot have a NON rest mass light wave break apart into 2 rest-mass particles or in annihilation have 2 rest mass particles become a Non rest mass light wave. What is really happening is a light wave is a closed loop and this light wave can be separated into 1/2 the energy going in one direction and 1/2 the energy in the opposite while both maintain zero rest mass.

And we can see this in the "Physics of the Atom" statement on page 190--
"Before union occurs, however, these particles sometimes revolve momentarily about their center of mass in a semistable configuration called positronium."

What the authors are describing is that the original gamma ray never separated into two rest mass particles, but separated in half of energy along the same closed loop of the original gamma ray, and the revolving about the center of mass, is evidence of a "closed loop", not some silly positronium new state of matter.

But what I wanted to say is that I myself had believed in Pair Production until just recently with the question of if Pair Production is true, would mean the proton and antiproton come from a high energy gamma ray, yet how in the world would you have a proton as a torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law. You cannot for that is insanity. I either drop the idea of Pair Production or have an insane concept of light waves turning into toruses doing Faraday law.

In Old Physics with their dumb short sided view of the atom subatomic particles as just silly balls doing no function, in such dumb views, you can say a Pair Production where Light Waves slip into or slip out of being protons or muons or positrons etc. But in a physics where subatomic particles have function, jobs, and structure themselves then this nonsense of Pair Production is trashcanned. But still explained as Light Waves are closed loop entities.

AP
King of Science and Logical Reasoning

Archimedes Plutonium
2020-12-02 07:05:22 UTC