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

Groups > sci.math > #435594 > unrolled thread

2AP gets to rename the Subatomic Particles because AP discovered Dirac's magnetic monopoles//Atom Totality 9th ed. //True Chemistry 1st ed

Back to article view | Back to sci.math

Contents

  2AP gets to rename the Subatomic Particles because AP discovered Dirac's magnetic monopoles//Atom Totality 9th ed. //True Chemistry 1st ed Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2019-02-27 13:50 -0800
    Re: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-28 05:20 +0000

#435594 — 2AP gets to rename the Subatomic Particles because AP discovered Dirac's magnetic monopoles//Atom Totality 9th ed. //True Chemistry 1st ed

2AP gets to rename the Subatomic Particles because AP discovered Dirac's magnetic monopoles//Atom Totality 9th ed. //True Chemistry 1st ed

Newsgroups: sci.physics 
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 14:10:06 -0800 (PST) 

Subject: AP gets to rename the Subatomic Particles because AP discovered 
 Dirac's magnetic monopoles//Atom Totality 9th ed. //True Chemistry 1st ed 
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com> 
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:10:07 +0000 

AP gets to rename the Subatomic Particles because AP discovered Dirac's magnetic monopoles//Atom Totality 9th ed. //True Chemistry 1st ed 


Alright, there is little doubt of what is AP's first and second great discoveries of science. The Atom Totality is always my finest discovery (I should say, more accurately, handed to me by the God's above), and my second most important discovery is that the Real Proton = 840MeV, Real Electron= muon = 105MeV and that little particle of .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole. This second discovery changes every hard science, in a big way. It completely overturns much if not all of physics and chemistry. So vast sweeping changes in all the hard sciences, that virtually every textbook in physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy are all obsolete by 2017. 

Yesterday, I detailed how the Sun causes Earth to orbit around the Sun via gravity = magnetism and gravity = EM. For a year or more now, I detailed how the inside of atoms work with a Faraday law going on with subatomic particles. And yesterday I detailed more on that "Charge" in Old Physics was really that of being a "Wire made up of photons and neutrinos". 

Today, I want to change the name of bad, poor, lousy terms in physics that go to obscure, confuse, obfuscate the science underlying the phenomenon in question. 

One of the reasons Old Physics was bad poor in understanding is they used such horrible horrible nonsense words for physics-- such as "charge". Suppose in physics, they went even worse with names such as "charge". Suppose in Physics starting with JJ Thomson in the 1800s used the names of people for particles, so that in 1897, Thomson discovered a .5MeV particle and named it Nancy, then when the proton was discovered, suppose it was named Peter, then when the neutron was discovered, suppose they named it Jennifer. You get the message? Names in science are very very important. When we misname a item of physics as "charge" that misname brings on more errors by thinking we have +1 charge and -1 charge when that is a false and bad error, compounding the original error. 

NAMES in physics and science are very important, and the names should be given that **geometrically describes the item-- as best as possible** 

Names in science should be geometry based-- if possible. If not possible to base the name in geometry, then base the name on some algebra idea. 

I do not know where the lousy hideous "charge" came from. I am only guessing that horses as in horsepower of the 1600s to modern times was used. So that William Gilbert book De Magnete 1600, through to Ben Franklin experiments in electricity-- that people of that time had in mind of "charging up their horses for a ride" This horse charging was transfered (sadly transfered to science of electricity and magnetism). 

So, what I propose to do is rename all the Subatomic Particles with a Name that is geometry based. 

Proton -- New Name is now Coilon, for the closed loop coil in Faraday Law 

Electron -- New Name is now Barmagneton, for the bar magnet in Faraday Law 

Neutron -- New Name is now Capacitoron, for the capacitor in EM theory 

Photon -- New Name is now Wireon, for wire is what the photon and neutrino and magnetic monopole are in physics EM theory 

Neutrino -- New Name is Wireon 

Magnetic Monopole -- we can keep that name or use Wireon. Magnetic Monopole = Wireon. 

Now in old physics Halliday& Resnick books they had a myriad of elementary particles-- and all of them are just compounded of the above. For instance the pion and kaons are either Wireons or Barmagnetons or compounds of those. The Lambda, Omega, Delta particles are coilons, barmagnetons or wireons or combinations of those three. 

Names are important for if you use bad, horrible names in science-- it depresses the mind into never getting the true underlying science correct and keeps the person in darkness about the science. 

Now the discovery also overturns ION theory in physics and chemistry. Ion theory in Old Physics was that of where they thought the electron was .5MeV when the electron is really 105MeV and does not play a role in electricity, rather the wireon is electricity. So Old Physics and Old Chemistry completely screwed up on ion theory. 

Should I rename Ion? I think I have to rename Ion to a geometry term that is most telling of what it is and how it works 

Ion-- its new name is Wireon, and sometimes we say Rewireon as in rewiring. Or we can say Dewireon as in removing wires or subtraction of wires. So that a Ca+2 or Ca-2 is calcium Rewireon where two wires are added or two wires are removed. 

-------- 

All of Chemistry bonding 

Now a few words on chemistry bonding for years now I have been posting that real electron = muon = 105 MeV because of angular momentum and chemistry bonding cannot exist with .5MeV. Turns out that is only partially true. Turns out (correct me if wrong) that all chemical bonds can easily be broken by Ultraviolet light. In other words Wireons of photons or neutrinos can easily break each and every chemical bond. This means chemistry bonding takes place with just photons and neutrinos and magnetic monopoles and never involves the muon or proton. 

Chemistry bonding is all about Wireons. 

And so our Ion theory needs to be tossed out the window of fakery shame. 

AP 

Very crude dot picture of 5f6 magnetosphere of 231Pu Atom Totality 

                ::\ ::|:: /:: 
                 ::\::|::/:: 
                     _ _ 
                   ( O ) 
                     - - 
                 ::/::|::\:: 
                ::/ ::|:: \:: 

One of those dots in the magnetosphere is the Milky Way galaxy. And 
each dot represents another galaxy. The O is the Cosmic nucleus. 

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]

#435630 — Re: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test

>Subject: George F. Smoot,Roy J. Glauber,David J. Gross  are you like Moroney
<200 lines of spammed failure deleted>

He did it again!! Plutonium failed all over the place again! And he is
throwing it all over the place, too! Why does he get mad at spammer but
is the biggest spammer in here by far?  Why does he deliberately fail
instead of doing math and physics??

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.math

csiph-web