Prev: Connect the 9-11 Dots to Israel
Next: Geometrical Interpretation of E=mc2 and "The Tipping Point"
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 5 Apr 2010 15:52
I wrote last night:
>
> What I am relying on is the idea that the electron has mass of 1 and
> space of 1876 whereas the proton has mass of 1876 and space of 1.
>
> And the way I derive the number 1876 for the proton mass relative to
> electron mass, is that only at the diameter of the larger sphere of
> 1876 diameter will those two opposite spinning
> log-spirals meet up at the Equator. So maybe there is a projection of
> projective geometry involved in this also.
>

Well, first off, I should have looked up a more accurate measure of
the
mass ratio of proton to electron, instead of relying on my memory.

The more accurate measure is 1836.1527.

I was wondering what the two Fibonacci numbers between that number
was:

1597, 2584

And I do not suppose that if the ratio was a Fibonacci number itself,
whether
that would make this derivation any easier. I suppose, though, that if
many of the mass
ratios of many of the elementary particles were a Fibonacci number,
then their
theory would have been easily solvable, because they formed an obvious
pattern.

However, I do have a pattern of the mass ratio of proton and electron
and the
inverse fine-structure constant, only it is begotten out of the Atom
Totality theory
dealing with just purely Atom Totality structure and pi, not the log
spiral. But
I suppose it is easy to render pi into a log-spiral accounting.

--- quoting from my Atom Totality book ---
The number 1836.1527 which is about 6(pi^5).  The last
electron subshell of a
plutonium atom is 5f6. Notice that the two digits of 5
and 6 are in both 6(pi^5)
and 5f6. So for the 6 electrons in the 5f energy shell
gives 6(pi^5).  When we
analyze electron parts of a Plutonium Atom Totality
measure the mass ratio of a
proton to an electron inside of (superpositioned onto)
a Plutonium Atom
Totality then the unitless number results as 6(pi^5).
In the next atom
totality of element 95, the mass ratio of proton to
electron as measured by
sacks of life atoms of life in a 95th electron
observable universe will be
7(pi^5).


(A)  THE MEANING OF THE INVERSE FINE-STRUCTURE MARKER
FOR THE NEUTRONS.  The
physical meaning of the inverse fine-structure marker
for the neutrons is the
fact that there are exactly 137 neutrons in the
nucleus of the Plutonium Atom
Totality, which is the isotope 231(a)94.


        The inverse fine-structure marker is a
variable in high energy physics. In
many books it is written as a constant which is
slightly more than the number
137, but this is incorrect with physics experiments.
In high energy physics, the
inverse fine-structure marker or the fine-structure
marker, either one is a
variable. But, over its range of values, the most
frequent value of the inverse
fine-structure marker is the number 137. Statistically
the average value of the
inverse fine-structure variable over its range of
values from high energy
physics to low energy physics is exactly 137. Because
the totality is a
dynamical system due to spontaneous neutron
materialization,i.e. the creation
of new matter in the universe in a logarithmic spiral
rate, then the inverse
fine-structure marker will increase with time since it
is a reflection of the
present atom totality that in the future it will
increase to 138.  The inverse
fine-structure marker is exactly 137 neutrons in the
collapsed wavefunction
and in the uncollapsed wavefunction of 231(a)94 when the
value of pi is taken as
exactly equal to 22/7, the inverse fine-structure
marker is exactly
((22/7)^7)/22.
--- end quoting from my other book ---

So notice that the mass ratio of electron to proton becomes 6(pi^5)
and that the
inverse fine structure constant becomes (pi^7)/22. These two numbers
would be
related to each other in the fact of their exponents are energy
structures in a plutonium
atom. And to convert the pi into a log-spiral.

The above suggests that the masses of all the other elementary
particles are
accessory masses, or what I am trying to say is that they are
unimportant particles.
They are not fundamental particles but merely add-ons of extra energy.

The above means that we have to explain only the mass of a few
particles such
as the proton, electron and neutrino, and perhaps why the neutron is
what it is,
but for all the other particles of Nature, well, they are merely an
excited with energy
electron or excited with energy proton. Unlike the Standard Model
which makes a
big fuss over "other particles" this thread would imply that the
subject of elementary
particles is overblown, and that the world of physics needs to only
consider the
stable elementary particles.

In a earlier time in physics with the building of these huge collider
machines, in order
to keep funding those machines, the elementary particles of physics
were propagandized
as being "independent and important" when in reality, anything other
than the proton,
electron, neutron, neutrino and muon were just "energy add on
uninteresting particles".
And the LHC which is in operation now, is perhaps the last straw of
this particle physics
nonsense of thinking that these derivative-particles have anything
important to do with physics. When the LHC fails to report a Higgs
particle, will they stop their nonsense
and focus on real-true physics and not their delusional physics? I
suspect not. Delusionals
in science seem to have a life-long disease of being delusional.

But what the LHC can do, is probably prove or convince most high
energy physicists that
a Fusion Barrier Law exists and that a machine can only reach 2/3
fusion breakeven in its
output. So if the LHC scientists divert their attention away from the
delusional Higgs and
focus on a fusion barrier law, the LHC would have been well worth its
time and price tag.

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: Connect the 9-11 Dots to Israel
Next: Geometrical Interpretation of E=mc2 and "The Tipping Point"