Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.math > #423466 > unrolled thread

2.3- a rectangular torus// What Geometry maximizes Space in terms of Space and Electricity// now we get to the many isomers of CO2

Back to article view | Back to sci.math

Contents

  2.3- a rectangular torus// What Geometry maximizes Space in terms of Space and Electricity// now we get to the many isomers of CO2 Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 19:03 -0700
    Re: Archimedes "Total Failure" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-13 02:59 +0000

#423466 — 2.3- a rectangular torus// What Geometry maximizes Space in terms of Space and Electricity// now we get to the many isomers of CO2

Alright, so using this formula e = B x l x v, let us build the world's superior electricity generator. But humans cannot build such a thing because Atomic subparticles have something engineering by humans can never provide-- perpetual motion. We can never do perpetual motion, so our electric generators will always fall short of the generators that atoms and molecules provide.

So, think of a cube or rectangular solid and the faces think of those 6 faces as a coil. A coil a bit different because the face has 4 vertices. But we all know that in EM theory, a vertex is not in any way of generating electricity in a Faraday law.

So each face is a proton coil of 8 windings all looking like this
___
|   |
---

or rectangle
________
|           |
--------

So, each face of an Atom of neon is a square or rectangle of a Proton Coil with 8 windings. The valence muons, those 6 muons in the P orbital of neon are 1 coil of 1 winding, and are far smaller of a coil that goes in and out (or as in a rectangular torus, stays perpetually inside the rectangular torus producing electricity.

So I am going to build such a device here at home just to see it more clearly.

AP

2.3Newsgroups: sci.physics 
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 14:53:54 -0700 (PDT) 

Subject: 2.1-What Geometry maximizes Space in terms of Space and Electricity// 
 now we get to the many isomers of CO2 
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com> 
Injection-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 21:53:54 +0000 

2.1-What Geometry maximizes Space in terms of Space and Electricity// now we get to the many isomers of CO2 

2.1-What Geometry maximizes Space in terms of Space and Electricity// now we get to the many isomers of CO2 

What was holding me back for over a month now, was-- "What Geometry maximizes Space in terms of Space and Electricity" for the answer to that tells me how atoms are arranged in chemical bonding. The answer is obvious, it is cube or rectangular solid for you can thence tile entire 3rd dimension. And the 6 faces become the P orbital of its 6 important valence muons with attendant protons. So, all I needed was that one important fact and it dawned on me yesterday, the answer-- cube or rectangular solid geometry. 

This further explains or is enhanced with the mathematics of e = B x l x v  which is a cube or rectangular solid as Cube = Length x Width x Depth 


Newsgroups: sci.math 
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 10:10:22 -0700 (PDT) 

Subject: true geometry of atoms- cubes or rectangular solids, based on 6 
 //Chemistry Physics, and the true CO2 molecule with its many isomers 
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com> 
Injection-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 17:10:22 +0000 

Alright, back to Chemistry Physics, and the true CO2 molecule with its many isomers. 

I had to assemble the carbon diamond molecule and the graphite molecule. 

I had to finalize in my mind, what is Maximum Electricity Generation, how to build a maximum electricity generator. 

Again quoting EdisonTechCenter.org for their writing style is superior as educational— 

If you take a lot of wire such as in a coil and move it in the field, you create a more powerful "flow" of electrons. The strength of your generator depends on:   

"l"-Length of the conductor in the magnetic field 
"v"-Velocity of the conductor (speed of the rotor) 
"B"-Strength of the electromagnetic field 

You can do calculations using this formula: e = B x l x v 


So, the key idea came to me yesterday, 11September2018. The key idea is that a cube or rectangular solid is 6 faces. Take each face as a muon of the P orbital 

P orbital = 1P_x , 2P_x, 1P_y, 2P_y, 1P_z, 2P_z 

The Metallic Bond is both malleable and ductile, meaning we can hammer into a plane or ductile-- form into a wire. The reason being is a cube or rectangular solid are malleable and ductile 

Each of those P suborbitals forms a face of a rectangular solid. 

This means that Nitrogen atom has 3 faces of a rectangular solid, and when two nitrogens combine N2, the  3 faces of one combines with the 3 faces of the other to form a rectangular solid. And in space, you can form a wire from rectangular solids or form a thin sheet of metal as the solids fill a planar space. 

So, remember the Faraday Law and in simple form, a closed loop (actually 8 loops) as the proton and a bar magnet as the muon. So, each face of a Cube or Rectangular Solid is a P_i suborbital. 

So if all 6 of the P suborbitals is filled then we have a Cube or Rectangular Solid composed of loops (protons) and muons as bar magnets. 

The geometry was what I was missing before, but now I have it -- and it is a great geometry for its utter simplicity-- cube or rectangular solid. It is based upon the number 6 as the Lewis Structure is bogus chemistry for that is based on number 8. 

I recently bought two science kits from "Thames Kosmos" and sadly, they are based on Lewis 8 structure, so I had to cut away two of the appendages on all its atoms, except for hydrogen which had the correct amount of appendages-- just 1. 

So, now, I can proceed to correctly identify the carbon diamond molecule and compare it to the carbon graphite molecule, knowing the solid structure is either a cube or rectangular solid and we envision that solid as loops of wire for the faces, the 6 faces. 

Of course, well, this destroys the Rutherford model of the atom with its idea 99% of the mass of each and every atom is in a tightly filled nucleus. Atoms do have a nucleus, but not all the protons reside in that nucleus, for the valence muons are attended to by valence protons. So today, in modern physics, we have to re-do the Rutherford Experiment proving that although there are nuclei in atoms, that they contain perhaps 60% to 50% of the mass while 40% to 50% of the mass is outside the nuclear region. 

For an atom like neon with 10 protons, 6 of those 10 protons are outside the nucleus, and those 6 protons are forming the faces of a cube or a rectangular solid. 



Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH 
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu 


                ::\ ::|:: /:: 
                 ::\::|::/:: 
                     _ _ 
                    (:Y:) 
                     - - 
                 ::/::|::\:: 
                ::/ ::|:: \:: 
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy. 
            . \ .  . | .   /. 
           . . \. . .|. . /. . 
              ..\....|.../... 
               ::\:::|::/:: 
---------------      ------------- 
--------------- (Y) ------------- 
---------------      -------------- 
               ::/:::|::\:: 
              ../....|...\... 
           . . /. . .|. . \. . 
            . / .  . | .   \ . 

  
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/ 
whole entire Universe is just one big atom 
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies 

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.       

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet. 

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe         
Archimedes Plutonium

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#423470 — Re: Archimedes "Total Failure" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

Math Failure Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails:

> now we get to the many isomers of CO2

Can you show the research papers which identify all those CO2 isomers?

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.math

csiph-web