atomic characteristics appearing as cosmic characteristics; the easiest is the nucleus as the missing mass chapt18; Galaxy evidence #265 Atom Totality
in [Physics]
|
Prev: atomic characteristics appearing as cosmic characteristics; does the cosmos have two poles, and thus a spin?? chapt18; Galaxy evidence #264 Atom Totality
Next: Bypass Google - Download Usenet mirror 1981-1991
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 8 Aug 2010 03:47 Well of course, the easiest atomic characteristic to translate into a cosmic feature is the Nucleus of an atom would be 99% of the mass of the atom and that would translate into a cosmic characteristic of a nucleus and the missing mass. The fact we do not directly observe a nucleus of the Cosmos is no hardship on the theory since nuclei are in nodes that are unobservable directly, only observable indirectly. So this is a classical example of where atomic feature translates into a cosmic feature and should prove the Atom Totality true and the Big Bang as false. But alot of scientists need to see a nucleus in a telescope or other instrument before they accept the Atom Totality. So that is one of the reasons I should make a detailed list of *atomic characteristics* and then try to determine what *cosmic characteristic* would accrue from that atomic feature. I already mentioned "spin" as atomically intrinsic, and raised the question of what if spin were translated into cosmic features? What can we expect to observe? I think we can expect that spin would create two poles of the Cosmos. Two poles where the galactic density is enormously high and away from the poles the galactic density decreases. So looking at cosmic mappings, the question arises as to whether Perseus supercluster is a cosmic pole and the Shapley supercluster the opposite cosmic pole? The thing nice about a Cosmic poles is that they are observable, whereas the "nucleus" may never be observable directly since it is in a plutonium node. And another feature that is worth looking into in detail is synchrotron radiation and as to whether the quasars, pulsars or the red-shift are the result of a cosmic-synchrotron radiation. What is so nice about this feature, unlike the missing mass, is that it is directly observable as witnessed by the existence of (a) quasars (b) pulsars (c) redshift. So in summary, what I am looking for is a characteristic of any atom which would have to translate into a characteristic of the observable Universe, and if I find a characteristic that is easy to identify in the cosmos, would almost immediately elevate the Atom Totality theory and trashcan the Big Bang. The missing mass as the nucleus of the Atom Totality should do it, except it has the problem that it is not directly observable because of atomic nodes. So would atomic-spin be observable? Does atomic structure have synchrotron radiation? And if so, does it translate into having quasars and pulsars and redshift? 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 |