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

Groups > sci.physics > #687561 > unrolled thread

4//40-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// the largest major bonding mistake of Old Chemistry graphite and diamond, they were confused over allotropes and isomers

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  4//40-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// the largest major bonding  mistake of Old Chemistry graphite and diamond, they were confused over allotropes and isomers Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 16:16 -0700
    Re: Archimedes Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-28 23:29 +0000

#687561 — 4//40-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// the largest major bonding mistake of Old Chemistry graphite and diamond, they were confused over allotropes and isomers

Newsgroups: sci.physics
Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 17:44:16 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: 39-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// theory of atoms, theory of
 chemistry, theory of paramagnetism, now back to CO2 has three or more isomers
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 00:44:16 +0000

39-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// theory of atoms, theory of chemistry, theory of paramagnetism, now back to CO2 has three or more isomers.

Theory of Atoms-- they are the only substance that exists in the Cosmos, implying automatically that the whole is an atom and specifically 231Pu Atom Totality

Theory of Chemistry-- atoms have subatomic particles which are perpetually performing Faraday's law, and the real electron = muon = 105 MeV and is the bar magnet of Faraday's law, the real proton = 840 MeV and is the coil of Faraday's law along with neutrons at 945 MeV. The Faraday law grows every atom that exists to be a higher atomic element. And the purpose of molecules and compounds and mixtures is to accelerate Faraday's law on atoms to create more magnetic monopoles and grow the atom faster.

Theory of paramagnetism and diamagnetism-- well the shape of protons is to form a torus and the muon electrons as bar magnets thrust through the torus made from protons and neutrons to create the magnetic monopoles which come in sizes of 2 eV up to .5MeV and are stored in neutrons until they reach 945 MeV and make that atom be 1 atomic number higher. Since it is protons that form the coil in Faraday's law as a torus, you need to pair two protons to form a complete torus, so if you have an atom or molecule with odd number of protons, left over alone protons then you have paramagnetism, or, as in the case of O2 or CO2, you have pseudo-orbitals and these are paramagnetism also. If all orbitals are filled in atoms and molecules of protons, then you have diamagnetism. And diamagnetic molecules such as N2, O3, CO, have filled orbitals and no pseudo-orbitals.

Theory of CO2 -- back to CO2 because I so much want this to have 3 or more isomers where animal CO2 is far different from fire derived CO2 such as burning fossil fuels or any fire derived CO2. I want this because we then are forced to save all large wild animals for plants can only use the animal CO2. The valence muons of CO2 are 2 + 4+4 = 10, and when 6 muons are used up to fill 2P, that leaves behind 4 muons. And those 4 muons either form a pseudo 1S, a pseudo 2S, or a pseudo 3S, either pseudo 1S with 2S, or pseudo 1S with 3S, or pseudo 2S with 3S to use up the 4 extra muons. So, CO2 has at least three different isomers, and I am guessing that Animal CO2 is that of least amount of energy to form CO2.


N2-- diamagnetic 

O2-- paramagnetic 

CO2-- paramagnetic 

O3-- diamagnetic 

CO-- diamagnetic 

C4 graphite -- diamagnetic anomaly

C5 diamond-- diamagnetic anomaly

B2-- paramagnetic 

H2O diamagnetic

H2 diamagnetic

D2 diamagnetic

CIF diamagnetic & paramagnetic anomaly

So, can I trust whether all of the above were experimentally derived or is it some web hack using his/her own rule. 

Alright, good, I think I have a tentative solution to the above, to finding out whether CO2 has three or more isotopes and to find out, which of the S orbitals are used in those three isotopes of S, the 1S, 2S, 3S to make animal CO2 versus the fire CO2 derived.

I believe the solution hinges on Graphite and Diamond molecules. The graphite has 4 carbons in bonding while diamond has 5 carbon in bonding. That means graphite is 2+2+2+2 valence muons leaving 2 extra muons left over, whilst diamond is 2+2+2+2+2 leaving 4 extra muons after forming a filled 2P. I shall not argue that both are diamagnetic.

Now, O2 is also 2 left over but is paramagnetic, so I must reconcile that, and reconcile I do, by noting that the 2 left-over muons in O2 are different from the 2 left-over muons in C4, because the 2 in O2 are just 2 protons with 2 muons while the 2 left-over in C4 are actually an entire C atom of 6 protons and 6 muons and their neutrons. Same thing goes for Diamond C5, in that the CO2 of its 10 valence muons, 4 left-over muons are 4 protons with attendant 4 muons, but in diamond the 4 left-over are fully 2 carbon atoms each with 6 protons and 6 muons.

So, when you have extra muon valence electrons forming pseudo-orbitals, those turn out to be paramagnetic molecules if the pseudo-orbitals are S orbitals, not a pseudo 2P orbital as in O3. And when the extra muon valence electrons are entire whole atoms as in graphite and diamond, they remain diamagnetic molecules.

AP

Newsgroups: sci.physics
Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 11:00:07 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: 40-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// the largest major bonding
 mistake of Old Chemistry graphite and diamond, they were confused over
 allotropes and isomers
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 18:00:08 +0000


40-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// the largest major bonding mistake of Old Chemistry graphite and diamond, they were confused over allotropes and isomers

Alright, I said I needed to go slow, real slow because I now found the major major error of Old Chemistry, the carbon bond.

In Old Chemistry they had a term of allotrope for oxygen that went like this.


3O2 --> 2O3 endothermic

They named that as allotrope-- different geometries of the same element in the same energy state, such as gases.

But Old Chemistry was totally wrong on carbon for they should have had

C3 + C3 --> graphite --> C3+C3 --> diamond endothermic

In my chart above, posted much earlier I write an anomaly after carbon diamagnetic, and anomaly because the true bond of graphite is a C3 filling the 2P in hexagonal sheets, there is no C bond to C on the z-axis, but carbon diamond is also C3. Geometrically the graphite is planar hexagonal

       C
C           C

C           C
       C

Planar in the sense that 1/2 of those carbons fill a 2P

        C
C             C

And the other half fill a pseudo 2P orbital and thus are diamagnetic

There is only a weak bond between planes of graphite but graphite formula is not what Old Chemistry thought of as C4 where each carbon is bonded to 3 other carbons, but rather C3. Now in spectroscopy I suppose that is where Old Chemistry makes that hideous mistake of interpretation.

Then the diamond C formula is also C3 only using the third dimension of x,y,z of the faces of a cube. Graphite uses hex, diamond uses cube faces, both use 6, for 2P orbital is all about 6, and the Old Chemistry probably thought that 8-- with the erroneous Lewis structure based on 8 applied. So the Lewis structure totally misled chemists of Old Chemistry, and fouled up badly with carbon.

Imagine a cube and stack cubes and each face of a cube is a C atom muon. There are 6 faces to a cube. When you flatten a cube to just 2 dimensions you make that cube a hexagonal array of 2 C3.

When you add enormous pressure and heat to graphite of its 2C3 hex pattern you turn graphite into diamond by turning the 2nd D, into a cube of C3 into x,y,z 3rd D where each muon is a cube face.

Both graphite and diamond are C3, for graphite is a 2C3 with filled 2P and with a pseudo 2P orbitals. For diamond, you still have the C3 but each electron=muon in the C3 is a face of a cube. A cube has 6 faces, so a diamond is C3 the same as graphite, only the diamond has no pseudo 2P, but rather has a pseudo 1S as each face joins to the face of another C3 cube and those are covalent bonds.

So in a sense graphite is the bonding of a 2P orbital alongside another 2P orbital of six carbon atoms in a plane. So graphite is the bonding of one 2P orbital with a second 2P orbital, while diamond is the bonding of three carbon atoms to form a 2P, and each of those 6 muons as 6 faces is covalently bonded to a exterior C3. Graphite is a bonded C3 to one other C3, while diamond is a C3 and all 6 muons are once again covalently bonded to a separate different C3 structure.

Summary of graphite and diamond-- both are C3 with filled 2P but then in the plane for graphite, it joins with another C3 molecule to form a pseudo 2P orbital. Diamond is three dimensional, whereas graphite is two dimensional hex. Diamond is a cube of its six muons, each forming a face of a cube and being covalently bonded to a adjoined cube face.

This is why graphite and diamond are diamagnetic-- totally paradoxical in Old Chemistry. If Old Chemistry had been true, then graphite and diamond would have been paramagnetic, just as O2 and CO2 are paramagnetic.

This is big big changes to all of Chemistry.

AP

On Monday, May 28, 2018 at 2:18:46 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now we can fix this table to what it should be, instead of the erroneous carbon bonding of graphite and diamond

N2-- diamagnetic 

O2-- paramagnetic 

CO2-- paramagnetic 

O3-- diamagnetic 

CO-- diamagnetic 

C4 graphite -- diamagnetic anomaly but anomaly goes away as we see graphite is also C3

C5 diamond-- diamagnetic anomaly but anomaly goes away as we see diamond is C3

B2-- paramagnetic 

H2O diamagnetic

H2 diamagnetic

D2 diamagnetic

CIF diamagnetic & paramagnetic anomaly

When carbon bonding is seen as C3 where you have valence muons of 2+2+2 filling the 2P orbital you of course have diamagnetic just as N2 or CO or H2O or even as O3 with its 2P filled and its 2P pseudo-orbital filled.

But as for carbon, perhaps the mistaken and silly Lewis structure based on the number 8 is to blame for why silly minded chemists thought graphite was C4 and diamond was C5, each carbon atom bonded to four surrounding C atoms in diamond and for graphite each carbon atom bonded to three surrounding C atoms. Perhaps spectroscopy or crystallography gave these chemist fools some support in their error.

For the bonding of graphite is never that of C4 = 2+2+2+2 valence muons. And never is the bonding of diamond that of C5 = 2+2+2+2+2. Both graphite and diamond were a bonding of C3 = 2+2+2 and what distinguishes graphite from diamond is that the C3 remains planar in graphite but 3rd Dimension in diamond. The fools of Old Chemistry should have realized a century ago or two centuries ago, that to achieve diamagnetism for graphite or diamond both had to be C3, never a C4 or C5 bonding.

AP

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#687564 — Re: Archimedes Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

Can you show us an actual scientific proof that it is a muon that forms
chemical bonds and not the electron? 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web