Prev: omega group
Next: Additive Creation Dirac's new radioactivities predicts why lithium, beryllium, boron are so rare Chapt 5 #174; ATOM TOTALITY
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 18 Jun 2010 02:37
#172 was so poorly written by me, that I feel compelled to rewrite it.

As I wrote in the 3rd edition of this book, I used the fact
that the Earth ocean water
was 160 ppm heavy water whereas on comets it is 320ppm. So that
factor
of 2X, I used that fact as a age reckoning
difference between the age of Earth versus the age
of Comets. In this 4th edition I am scrapping that usage in favor of
using the 160 ppm versus 320ppm for a supporting proof of Dirac's
new radioactivities-additive creation. The difference in heavy water
on Earth versus Comets, maybe, just maybe the evidential proof
of Dirac's new radioactivities. And of course, if it turns out to be a
proof,
there are other chemicals on various planets and comets which would
also
be in a proportional difference to further prove Dirac's new
radioactivities
additive creation.
In the 3rd edition, I was arguing for a multiplicative creation of
Dirac new radioactivities,
and in this 4th edition I am arguing that the creation process is
additive, not multiplicative.

So I have two experiments to help prove Dirac's new radioactivities.
I have the experiment (A) where I count out 100 uranium atoms; isolate
them in a special container; wait and then hope to find 99 uranium
atoms
with 1 plutonium atom. The I have experiment (B) where I take a given
quantity of Earth simulated ocean water and another sample of a
simulated
Comet water and I bombard both with cosmic rays (protons) and expect
to find a 160ppm versus 320ppm heavy water end result, where 1/2X the
protons go into making heavy salt in the Ocean water. Both these
experiments
are experiments to prove Dirac new radioactivities.

So this experiment (B) is a rather good one, replacing Dirac's
astronomical experiments
that the Moon should approach Earth by 2cm/year if additive and
recede
by 2cm/year
if multiplicative. In my experiment I get rid of astronomical motion
measurement because the
motion of planets and the Moon are far to complex and complicated to
retrieve any reliable
small motion. Anyone can raise a fuss and claim tidal effects or
numerous
other astronomical effects. I need a experiment where noone can raise
fussess.

In experiment B, we imitate additive
creation by bombarding with protons, and then depending
on what we learn from the imitation, see if the same effect occurred
somewhere in
Nature. In our case, see if Ocean water and Comet water end up with
the
160ppm and 320ppm. We get a container of Earth ocean water that is not
quite
ocean salinity nor the
160ppm of heavy water and we bombard it with cosmic rays
(protons) and we see if we thence approach the identical contents of
present day ocean
water. Then we get water that is pre-Comet conditions of not quite
320ppm heavy water
and have somewhat the salinity of Comet water. Bombard it with
cosmic
rays (protons)
and see if the outcome is that approaching what Comet water actually
is.


So it seems safe to say that if we set up experiments that imitates
Dirac's additive creation
and find that the outcome is a approach of what the actual present
day
conditions of the Earth's ocean waters and the waters in Comets.
That
such a result would validate the Dirac
new radioactivities. This is easier to do rather than be observing
water for
actual cosmic rays to strike that water and thence build up the
160ppm.

In Experiment A, we actually do wait around for a cosmic ray or
whatever
else involves the Additive Creation in New Radioactivities to enter
the isolated
chamber where the 100 uranium atoms are counted and observed and to
change
one of them into a plutonium atom. So experiment A is an actual watch
and wait
to verify Additive Creation. In experiment B, we are lazy in waiting
and so we
simulate cosmic rays by bombarding two samples imitating Earth ocean
and
Comet water, and by bombarding, we expect the trend of 160ppm and
320ppm
to continue.

Dirac's attempts to prove his new radioactivities via Shapiro and Van
Flandern (Directions in Physics, 1978) were simply
not aggressive enough of experiments that used the Moon and planets
to
eke out a
tiny motion of 2cm/year for the Moon. Just not aggressive enough of
experiments and
hard to unravel the complicated motions of the Moon that would mask
the 2cm/year.

I think we have far better luck of proving Dirac's new radioactivities-
additive
creation by the slow buildup of chemical differences between different
astro bodies such as Comets versus Earth. Or such as Sun versus Earth
as per the lighter elements such as the elements before we reach
carbon.

And another good place to look for Dirac's new radioactivities is the
Jupiter
and its satellites or Saturn and its satellites. The disparity in the
abundance
of chemical elements would be very noticeable if Dirac's new
radioactivities
is true.

So my experiments are far more aggressive in questioning the
existence
of Dirac's New
Radioactivities. My experiment simulates new-radioactivities should
it
exist. By bombarding
a container with protons (cosmic rays) I simulate additive creation
of
new radioactivities.
I bombard a closed container with protons and see if I can turn a
pre-
160ppm and a pre 320ppm
of heavy water versus heavy-salt.


My other experiment is to simply wait, having counted out precisely
100 atoms of uranium,
and wait for one or two of them to convert into plutonium.


I think the aggressive experiment of imitating new radioactivities is
a far better experiment
in terms of time. And instead of say the heavy water and salinity of
Earth and Comets, I can
focus on other chemistry such as the Jupiters chemistry with
Europa's
chemistry. Or say
the chemistry of Mars with that of Earth since Earth is more massive
and
dense, that it should have a different aufbau of chemical elements if
additive
creation is true.

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: omega group
Next: Additive Creation Dirac's new radioactivities predicts why lithium, beryllium, boron are so rare Chapt 5 #174; ATOM TOTALITY