atomic characteristics appearing as cosmic characteristics; does the cosmos have two poles, and thus a spin?? chapt18; Galaxy evidence #264 Atom Totality
in [Physics]
|
Prev: How does mutual time dilation work with one twin aging faster?
Next: atomic characteristics appearing as cosmic characteristics; the easiest is the nucleus as the missing mass chapt18; Galaxy evidence #265 Atom Totality
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 8 Aug 2010 01:08 Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > I happened to spy some old posts of mine in a chemistry forum > archiving some of my > old posts: > > --- quoting some archived old posts of mine --- > Chemistry > > > > Chemistry Science Re: Synchrotron Radiation intrinsic to atomic > structure? Re: pulsars &quasars h > (snipped) Actually I have not thought-out or made a detailed list of the atomic characteristics and tried matching them with cosmic characteristics. Some cosmic characteristics we are familar with are galaxy-solar system, color, microwave radiation quantized at 2.71 K, temperature, geometrical shape of dodecahedron. But what about other characteristics of atomic structure? Is synchrotron radiation a atomic feature? If so, how would it show itself on a cosmic scale? The electron-dot-cloud of atomic structure appears as the cosmic structure of galaxies and planetary-systems embedded in space. So if synchrotron radiation were an instrinsic atomic feature how would it show itself in the cosmos? Would it be the quasars, or maybe the pulsars? Or, perhaps synchrotron radiation is the redshift of galaxies? I do not know as of yet, even whether synchrotron radiation is a intrinsic feature of an atom. I do know that "spin" is an intrinsic feature of an atom, and designated as spin 1/2. But here, I am not sure how "spin" becomes a cosmic observable feature. Our first inclination would be to think of a spinning toy top, but that is a oversimplification. However, it maybe the case that atomic spin does actually turn out to be some cosmic spin of sorts, where the cosmos is moving about a axis. And evidence of this may arrive in the form of there being observable poles in the cosmos. If we find that there is a galactic wall at the Sloan Great Wall and then another galactic wall on the opposite side of the cosmos, then we can say the Universe has two poles, which then implies a cosmic "spin". --- requoting previous text --- I am having a hard time in locating good enough pictures of the Perseus-Pisces supercluster and the Pavo-Indus supercluster. Here is a better picture than what Jarrett's mapping shows: http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/nearsc.html http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/wnearsc.gif --- end quoting --- The reason I bring up the perseus supercluster is that it appears to be on the opposite side of the Sloan and Great Wall superclusters. So that perhaps the cosmos has two polar regions? And the only explanation for two poles would be a cosmic spin, and of course that would be a ultimate and deciding data or observation and would immediately trashcan the Big Bang theory. 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 |