Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #686270 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-05-18 19:45 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-05-21 04:22 +0000 |
| Articles | 5 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
7-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// cosmic abundance of elements, predicting why Oxygen and Carbon have large cosmic abundances Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-18 19:45 -0700
Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-21 03:44 +0000
Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-21 03:54 +0000
Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-21 04:17 +0000
Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-21 04:22 +0000
| From | Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 19:45 -0700 |
| Subject | 7-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// cosmic abundance of elements, predicting why Oxygen and Carbon have large cosmic abundances |
| Message-ID | <23d96bda-d8a2-40ba-b1ec-76dcc0c94686@googlegroups.com> |
Newsgroups: sci.physics Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 12:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 6-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// cosmic abundance of elements, and can I predict the abundance of C and O From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com> Injection-Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 19:59:53 +0000 6-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// cosmic abundance of elements, and can I predict the abundance of C and O On Friday, May 18, 2018 at 2:33:13 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: (snipped) > I left off with unanswered questions, the questions of cosmic abundance of elements suggests that if all matter is in the process of making new heavier elements, whether atoms or molecules via Faraday law of conversion of Space into magnetic monopoles-- implies that Be more abundant than Li, that Mg more abundant than Na, that Ca more abundant than K, that Sr more abundant than Rb, that Ba more abundant than Cs, all due to the fact that there is more monopole creation in the Be column with its 2 bar magnet thrust of Faraday law versus the 1 bar magnet thrust of the Li column. > > From Grevesse & Anders, 1988 # per 10^6 atoms silicon > > Na 5.7*10^4 whereas Mg 1.1*10^6 > > K 3.8*10^3 whereas Ca 6.1*10^4 > > Rb 7.0 whereas Sr 24 > > Cs .37 whereas Ba 45 > > I need a cosmic abundance of elements chart-- source Internet from Grevesse & Anders 1988, where the last column is cosmic abundance as number of atoms per 10^6 atoms silicon. Abundances At. No. Element Solar system atoms 1 H 2.8 × 10^10 2 He 2.7 × 10^9 3 Li 57 4 Be 0.7 5 B 21 6 C 1.0 × 10^7 7 N 3.1 × 10^6 8 O 2.4 × 10^7 9 F 8.5 × 10^2 10 Ne 3 × 10^6 11 Na 5.7 × 10^4 12 Mg 1.1 × 10^6 13 Al 8.5 × 10^4 14 Si 1.0 × 10^6 15 P 1.0 × 10^4 16 S 5.2 × 10^5 17 Cl 5.2 × 10^3 18 Ar 1.0 × 10^5 19 K 3.8 × 10^3 20 Ca 6.1 × 10^4 21 Sc 34 22 Ti 23 V 2.9 × 10^2 24 Cr 1.3 × 10^4 25 Mn 9.5 × 10^3 26 Fe 9.0 × 10^5 27 Co 2.3 × 10^3 28 Ni 5.0 × 10^4 29 Cu 5.2 × 10^2 30 Zn 1.3 × 10^3 31 Ga 38 32 Ge 1.2 × 10^2 33 As 6.6 34 Se 63 35 Br 12 36 Kr 48 37 Rb 7.0 38 Sr 24 39 Y 4.6 40 Zr 11.4 41 Nb 0.70 42 Mo 2.6 43 Tc Unstable with short period 44 Ru 1.9 45 Rh 0.34 46 Pd 1.4 47 Ag 0.49 48 Cd 1.6 49 In 0.19 50 Sn 3.9 51 Sb 0.31 52 Te 4.9 53 I 0.9 54 Xe 4.8 55 Cs 0.37 56 Ba 4.5 57 La 0.44 58 Ce 1.1 59 Pr 0.17 60 Nd 0.83 61 Pm Unstable with short period 62 Sm 0.26 63 Eu 0.097 64 Gd 0.33 65 Tb 0.060 66 Dy 0.40 67 Ho 0.089 68 Er 0.25 69 Tm 0.038 70 Yb 0.25 71 Lu 0.037 72 Hf 0.15 73 Ta 0.038 74 W 0.13 75 Re 0.05 76 Os 0.67 77 Ir 0.66 78 Pt 1.34 79 Au 0.19 80 Hg 0.34 81 Tl 0.19 82 Pb 3.1 83 Bi 0.14 84–89 Po–Ac Unstable with short period 90 Th 0.045 91 Pa Unstable with short period 92 U 0.018 93–102 Np–No Unstable with short period And above, I predicted the Be column more common than the Li column, so I am wondering if this theory of maximum electricity can predict the abundance of Carbon and Oxygen in the Cosmos? Is it the fact that C and O are so prone to bond with other elements, that they produce more magnetic monopoles, hence more carbon and more oxygen. -------- Alright so, I predicted from the Maximum Electricity Coil that the Be column of chemical elements is far more abundant than the Li column and due to the fact that the Be elements have 2 muons as thrusting bar magnets in Faraday's Law as the S two muons, whereas the Li column as only one S muon to serve as bar magnet. This then suggests a means of understanding why Oxygen atoms are so cosmically abundant and about twice as abundant as Carbon atoms in the cosmos. That Oxygen has far more free valence muons to act as bar magnets in Faraday law. So we inspect the electrons= muons of carbon and oxygen, not so much the individual atom but their bonded molecules. So C forms into graphite or diamond where in graphite each C atom has 3 other C atoms surrounding it and in diamond, each C atom has four other C atoms surrounding it. C has a valence muons of 2 in the P orbital, so for graphite we have 2 + 2+2+2 = 8, for diamond we have 2+2+2+2+2 = 10. For Oxygen we have 4 valence muons in P orbital so for O2 we have 4+4 = 8 For Nitrogen we have 3 valence muons in P orbital so for N2 we have 3+3 = 6 In all these molecules each has a 2S orbital filled with two muons being the bar magnets in Faraday's Law But now, O2 has two left over muons for it takes just 6 muons to fill P orbital, thus O2 has 4 muons to act as thrusting bar magnet in Faraday's Law. Same goes for carbon graphite and the carbon versus oxygen abundance are different by just a factor of 2.4. Nitrogen as N2 has not left over muon and so its two S orbital electrons are the only serving bar magnet, so Oxygen is 10 times more abundant than nitrogen. Now Fluorine, why is it about 10^5 less abundant than Oxygen? Well, fluorine seeks a lone electron = muon and this seeking often takes one of the S orbital muons used to be a bar magnet in Faraday's law, and so the low abundance of fluorine compared to Oxygen. AP
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-21 03:44 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test |
| Message-ID | <pdtfbo$pke$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #686270 |
>Michael Moroney anal buttfuckmanure stalker for 26 years Thank you for requesting another Babble-o-meter Calculation! ☑ Archie reposts the same old, same old, yet again... ☑ ...and again and again... ☑ ...and again and again... ☑ ...posted enough times to be classified as spam... ☑ ...Post has no new content, in fact... ☐ ...Archie's spam complains about other spammers or babblers... ☑ ...Purpose of post is to remain #1 Front Page Hog... ☐ .....meanwhile, Archie complains of some other "Front Page Hog"... ☐ ...Post posted in the wrong topic... ☐ .....and to the wrong newsgroup... ☐ ...Author awards self Nobel Prize/claims he should be so awarded... ☐ .....Author rejects self-awarded Nobel, real awardees don't deserve it... ☐ ...Author sour grapes Nobel or other science/math prize... ☑ ...Post has science or math 100% made up from whole cloth... ☑ ...Post's science/math based on earlier whole cloth science/math... ☑ .....which was based on even earlier whole cloth science/math... ☑ .....which was, oh never mind... ☑ ...Post contains The Truth because Archie said it is true... ☑ ...Phrases such as "Old Science" (actual science) and "New Science (babbling of author)... ☑ ...One word: Logorrhea... ☑ ...Another word: Graphomania... ☐ ...Author thinks cutting up magazines disproves actual math proofs... ☑ ...Author thinks a bad dream is an excellent basis for physics... ☑ ...Archie doesn't understand Usenet, not even after 26+ years... ☑ ...Archie asks Google Groups to do something they can't do... ☑ ...Archie even thinks Google runs Usenet... ☑ .....even though Archie used Usenet even before there even was a Google... ☑ ...Archie won't engage in discussion in a discussion group... ☑ ...Writes "Keep out of my threads!"... ☐ ...Archie demands professors resign for not teaching his broken math... ☐ ...Post includes a stalker list of physics and/or math professors... ☐ ...Archie outwitted by someone too stoopid to come out of the rain AGAIN... ☑ ...Archie can't get over the shame of messing up percentages... ☑ ....he even still thinks 8.88 is "exactly" 9... ☐ ....and he thinks 16.81 is "spot on" 17... ☐ ...Archie is envious that I weighed the electron and he didn't... ☐ ...Post includes the dumb ascii art cat/owl thing... ☐ ...Post contains ascii art of Archie's butthole... ☐ ...and Archie doesn't realize ascii art is so 1980s... ☐ ...Archie tries to involve totally uninvolved people... ☐ .....with a subject about flunking a nonexistent test no one ever took... ☐ .....but has no clue they will never see his post... ☐ .....and has no clue they probably don't know what Usenet is... ☐ .....he expects them to have power/authority they simply don't... ☑ ...Too stoopid to realize attack posts just produce more posts like this... ☑ ...Google Groups poster. 'Nuf said. Archie's Babbling Nonsense score: 23 plutoniums!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-21 03:54 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test |
| Message-ID | <pdtfu6$pke$7@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #686270 |
Why do you hate science and math so much that you wish to destroy these groups?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-21 04:17 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test |
| Message-ID | <pdth8m$jjm$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #686270 |
Why do you hate science and math so much that you wish to destroy these groups?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-21 04:22 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the lifetime-generation test |
| Message-ID | <pdthin$jjm$8@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #686270 |
>Michael Moroney anal buttfuckmanure stalker for 26 years Thank you for requesting another Babble-o-meter Calculation! >☑ Archie reposts the same old, same old, yet again... >☑ ...and again and again... >☑ ...and again and again... >☑ ...posted enough times to be classified as spam... >☑ ...Post has no new content, in fact... >☐ ...Archie's spam complains about other spammers or babblers... >☑ ...Purpose of post is to remain #1 Front Page Hog... >☐ .....meanwhile, Archie complains of some other "Front Page Hog"... >☐ ...Post posted in the wrong topic... >☐ .....and to the wrong newsgroup... >☐ ...Author awards self Nobel Prize/claims he should be so awarded... >☐ .....Author rejects self-awarded Nobel, real awardees don't deserve it... >☐ ...Author sour grapes Nobel or other science/math prize... >☑ ...Post has science or math 100% made up from whole cloth... >☑ ...Post's science/math based on earlier whole cloth science/math... >☑ .....which was based on even earlier whole cloth science/math... >☑ .....which was, oh never mind... >☑ ...Post contains The Truth because Archie said it is true... >☑ ...Phrases such as "Old Science" (actual science) and "New Science (babbling of author)... >☑ ...One word: Logorrhea... >☑ ...Another word: Graphomania... >☐ ...Author thinks cutting up magazines disproves actual math proofs... >☑ ...Author thinks a bad dream is an excellent basis for physics... >☑ ...Archie doesn't understand Usenet, not even after 26+ years... >☑ ...Archie asks Google Groups to do something they can't do... >☑ ...Archie even thinks Google runs Usenet... >☑ .....even though Archie used Usenet even before there even was a Google... >☑ ...Archie won't engage in discussion in a discussion group... >☑ ...Writes "Keep out of my threads!"... >☐ ...Archie demands professors resign for not teaching his broken math... >☐ ...Post includes a stalker list of physics and/or math professors... >☐ ...Archie outwitted by someone too stoopid to come out of the rain AGAIN... >☑ ...Archie can't get over the shame of messing up percentages... >☑ ....he even still thinks 8.88 is "exactly" 9... >☐ ....and he thinks 16.81 is "spot on" 17... >☐ ...Archie is envious that I weighed the electron and he didn't... >☐ ...Post includes the dumb ascii art cat/owl thing... >☐ ...Post contains ascii art of Archie's butthole... >☐ ...and Archie doesn't realize ascii art is so 1980s... >☐ ...Archie tries to involve totally uninvolved people... >☐ .....with a subject about flunking a nonexistent test no one ever took... >☐ .....but has no clue they will never see his post... >☐ .....and has no clue they probably don't know what Usenet is... >☐ .....he expects them to have power/authority they simply don't... >☑ ...Too stoopid to realize attack posts just produce more posts like this... >☑ ...Google Groups poster. 'Nuf said. Archie's Babbling Nonsense score: 23 plutoniums!
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web