Prev: Dave Rothschild On Astro Physics & Alex Jones' "Scientific Dictatorship" Re: America: The Dark Ages For Science
Next: 9-11 Truth makes HUGE stinking turd pile at Los Angeles Kook March
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 21 Apr 2010 13:28

I have a picture of the 5f6 of Plutonium in the book
THE ELEMENTS BEYOND URANIUM, Seaborg & Loveland, 1990, and page 73.

Shape of the Cosmos is more important than the color of the Cosmos.
And ever since I published and broadcast the Atom Totality theory
starting in 1991 in newspaper and magazines and on the Internet in
1993, that I have stated many times that the 5f6 Observable Universe
is the shape of 6 lobes. This can be seen quite clearly in the book
"The Elements Beyond Uranium" Seaborg & Loveland 1990, page
73 the General Set of nonrelativistic f orbital shapes. Now that
same
page shows the Cubic Set and the reader must realize that although
the lobes look like 8 lobes, that keep in mind that they are the
inside of a CUBE and a cube is a 6 faced regular-polyhedra.

This book has a chapter devoted to just the space of the Universe
and it was found in the 2000s decade by the Luminet team of
researchers that the Microwave radiation of the Cosmos fits a
Poincare Dodecahedral Space as the best shape of the Cosmos.
A dodecahedron is 12 faces. I find this as not alarming because
as mentioned earlier, that the nonrelativistic energy is 1/2 mv^2
and relativistic energy is mc^2, where one equation has a factor
of 1/2. And that 6 is 1/2 of that of 12.

The Seaborg and Loveland book on page 73 shows the 5f6 and the
lobes of that subshell. I often mention the word "lobes" as elongated
ellipsoids and this page of the book shows those lobes.

Postscript to Chapter 1 on redshift: Last night, luckily, I resolved
the redshift issue
for the Big Bang versus the Atom Totality. I need not have pursued on
whether the
blueshift or redshift data favors either the Big Bang or the Atom
Totality. I need
not have looked to see what each theory predicts for a blueshift or to
what
magnitude of a redshift occurs. The issue of redshift and blueshift
with the
Big Bang versus Atom Totality is all resolved by whether each theory
can have
a viable physics to promote their redshift and blueshift. The Big Bang
fails.

As I was looking at Hubble's law, it was graphed to where it had
increments of the
speed of light. Not only does the Big Bang reach the speed of light
but exceeds it
for one graph had from 0 to c to 2c to 3c to 4c to 5c and beyond. I
suppose these
people who believe in the Big Bang would also believe that a ship on
ocean tides
travelling at the speed of light, that the ship would stay in tact and
not disintegrate.

The Big Bang theory explains redshift as that of Space moving and
carrying along
with Space the galaxies. So Big Bangers impart a speed to galaxies
with the speed
of light and beyond. These Big Bangers have to explain these
questions:
(a) How is Space so independent of the Cosmos itself, when Space is
never independent
in normal physics?
(b) How can Space be moving at the speed of light and not have the
galaxies moving
with the speed of light?
(c) Why should Space in the Big Bang theory be treated differently in
physics, whereas
in all other physics, space is treated as if it is a medium that is
motionless?
(d) Had Big Bang believers ever heard of "resonance energy" and that
if you have a galaxy
nested inside a space moving at the speed of light, how in the world
would that galaxy
not bust and break apart due to resonance.

The Atom Totality theory rests on a simple experiment that anyone can
do in their homes
if they have a view of a road with car headlights. Simply buy a sheet
of opaque fiberglass and tilt it slightly in the the window. The sheet
I have comes from a greenhouse and has some
corrugations, but a flat sheet tilted would do. Anyway, the oncoming
white light headlights of
cars are all redshifted. The further away the car is, the more the
redshift. So the speed is
irrelevant and the concern of whether the car is moving towards the
window or away from
the window is irrelevant. The redshift is caused by the refraction of
light as it passes through
the fiberglass. So what this experiment tells us of the Cosmic
Redshift of galaxies is that
it is caused by the geometry of Space, and not a Doppler Redshift of
galaxies in a expanding
universe. In fact the Universe is probably pretty much stationary or
at rest.

So the redshift is due to white light travelling large distances in a
bent and curved space ends
up being redshifted.

So one needs not have to figure out the predictions of the Big Bang
theory as per what to
expect of redshift and blueshift. Nor does one have to figure out the
predictions of the
Atom Totality with respect to blueshift and redshift. All one has to
do is realize that the
Big Bang imposes anti-physics or non-physics upon that of physics. The
Big Bang expects
you to believe we can have a Space that is independent of the rest of
the Universe and that
this space can carry galaxies with the speed of light. So the Big Bang
is anti-physics.

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Dave Rothschild On Astro Physics & Alex Jones' "Scientific Dictatorship" Re: America: The Dark Ages For Science
Next: 9-11 Truth makes HUGE stinking turd pile at Los Angeles Kook March