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

Groups > sci.math > #423522 > unrolled thread

geometry of the isomers of CO2 // now we get to the many isomers of CO2

Back to article view | Back to sci.math

Contents

  geometry of the isomers of CO2 // now we get to the many isomers of CO2 Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 15:19 -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 22:26 +0000

#423522 — geometry of the isomers of CO2 // now we get to the many isomers of CO2

Newsgroups: sci.physics
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 15:09:57 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: geometry of the isomers of CO2 // now we get to the many isomers of CO2
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:09:58 +0000


geometry of the isomers of CO2 // now we get to the many isomers of CO2

On Thursday, September 13, 2018 at 4:10:37 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: 
> 2.4Newsgroups: sci.math 
> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 19:03:14 -0700 (PDT) 
> 
> Subject: 2.3- a rectangular torus// 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: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 02:03:15 +0000 
> 
> 2.4- 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. 
> 


I am using paper clips to build these miniature cubes or rectangular solids. I take a individual paper clip and bend it in half, so that one half appears | and the other half appears ___ 

|__ 


Now I call that single paper clip a One Muon of Six Muons that fill the P orbital. 

Now as I build a cube or rectangular solid from bent paper clips, if they overlap on a face, means it is a 2 winding, or a number of windings, but the cube or rectangle solid is the geometry outcome. Actually this is what the Dirac Equation and Schrodinger Equations amount to in the Cubic Solutions. The Elements Beyond Urananium, Seaborg, Loveland, page 73, 1990. 

So now, Neon, the single atom has a filled P orbital and forms a cube of its P_x, P_y, P_z filled and is a inert gas because it is filled P orbital-- never wants to bond, for why bond when you have the perfect cube geometry. 

Next we have what comes closest to neon as a perfect cube and that is either N2 or CO. 

Where we have 6 valence muons, those six muons forming almost a perfect cube. 

I have them sitting in front of me right now, from the Thames &Kosmos education kit, only I cut off two of the tentacles on most of the atoms they provided because Chemistry bonding is based on the number 6, not 8 Lewis Structure. Each tentacle is a valence muon. So for N2, I have 3tentacles on one N and 3 on the other N and N2 is where all 6 tentacles, 6 muons are shared. 

Now, CO also has 6 valence muons, 4 from the O and 2 from the C. Now, in the CO bond, the 2 muons of C share with the solo muons of O, but what is different between CO and N2, is that the two filled P_x suborbital, that entire suborbital is shared by C, for C has no more muon to give. Unlike N2, each of the P_x, P_y, P_z is given a contribution by both N, but in CO, a entire suborbital of P_x is surrendered over to the C atom from the O atom. 

And this is why N2 has a lower dissociation energy than does CO for the C atom bond of the entire P_x is stronger. We have 1076 versus 946 (see below) 

source: chem.ucsb.edu 

in kJ/mol 

CO 1076 
C2H2 962 
N2  946 
HCN  937 
CN 770 
H2OC  732 
CO2 532 
ON2 480 
CH4 431 
CH  337 
O2  498 
ON  630 
H2  436 
HD  439 
D2  443 

ozone O3 is 142.7 kJ/mol (source Univ Waterloo) 





> 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. 
> 

Now, let me introduce a new term in Chemistry Physics, of the Antennae Bond of valence muons. 

Putting together CO2 from the Thames&Kosmos education kit (remember, I cut off 2 tentacles on most atoms for true chemistry is based on 6 not on 8) 

And putting together CO2 we see the 6 tentacles (6 muons shared) between C and O and O. However, in the end we have two tentacles of the P_x of the first O and the two tentacles of the second O of its P_x have them sticking up like a antennae. These two antennae are fully closed loops able to do the Faraday Law but these two antennae are not part of the bonding of C with O and with O. 

CO2 532 kJ/mol of dissociation energy 

Now, the reason it is easier to pull apart CO2 than it is to pull apart CO or N2, is because of these 2 pairs of Antennae of the P_x orbitals of the two Os in CO2. Then stick out, and when they come into contact with something of a stronger attraction, it is easy to rip apart CO2 to form some other compound. This is why CO is twice as strong as is CO2 

CO is 1076 and CO2 is 532, virtually twice as strong for CO with a sigma error of 1076/1064 = 1% sigma error. 

The underlying reason for twice as strong of CO than CO2 is that those 2 Antennae closed loops stick out and make it easier to dissociate. 
- show quoted text -
And now we come to the question of isomers of CO2. 

Two possible isomers would be much like the CO molecule where the P_x of O those two muons bond directly unto the C atom. In the case of CO2, produced from hot fire, one of the P_x of either O_1 or O_2 can directly bond to the missing P_z of Carbon. 

Or, many combinations of the P_x of Oxygen, can bond with the missing P_z of carbon in CO2 

The trouble with CO2 that was no trouble for CO, is that CO has its carbon atom of its P_x, P_y,P_z fully covered, while in CO2, the carbon atom P_z is totally empty. So, depending on the Energy Environment that the CO2 molecule is created in, if in biology respiration the CO2 is in lowest energy form, where it has 2 antennae of the P_x, and it has a totally absent P_z of its carbon atom. Whilst CO2 produced in hot fires, that CO2 is likely to have contributions of the antennae muons to filling or partial filling of the P_z of Carbon atom. 

So, if all true, means that plants can only use the CO2 that animals breathe out, and that plants will suffocate from CO2 that is produced in fires. 

AP

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#423523 — Re: Archimedes "Total Failure" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

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

>>Can you show the research papers which identify all those

>AP writes:  yes, sad situation in world mathematics and science, that it 
>is easier for the liaring president Donald Trump to tell the truth about his 

I take that as "no".

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.math

csiph-web