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

Groups > sci.physics > #687331

36-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// Proofs that Chemistry is more about protons than about electrons

Show all headers | View raw

On Sunday, May 27, 2018 at 1:30:16 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Alright good progress, and said i had to go slow on this.
> 

No, this is excellent, excellent  progress.

> So the definition of diamagnetic in New Chemistry has nothing to do with the electrons = muons, only to do with the attendent proton, in that a proton all alone is only a 1/2 built torus, a half circle, and the photons coming out of this 1/2 torus is electric charge, hence Paramagnetism.
> 

Now can attendant be spelled attendent, but more important, is there a Physics term for "attendant", and, is it "bond". So that the muon is bonded to the proton, or, proton bonded to the muon. But that is highly unlikely for this would be the Faraday Law of Physics and we do not say the bar magnet is bonded to the coil, or, do we?

So, this would be highly highly a pressing question of Logic. In the Faraday Law, is there bonding of the bar magnet to the closed loop wire. Perhaps there is, and this would be the most primitive form of "Bond" in physics or chemistry, sort of a "axiom of bonding".

You, see, I have to go real slow on all of this, for, not to miss anything.

> Diamagnetism is thus simple and easy— all the protons are fully built as a whole torus with no charge coming out of them.
> 

You see, I am reversing all of Old Chemistry, by reversing I mean, what Old Chemistry thought the electron was doing and causing, is now, -- what the proton is doing and causing, and thus, Chemistry is the study of protons, more than the study of electrons. I have to go slow on this.


> This suggests two urgent and important experiments— prove each muon is tagged uniquely to a attendant proton. Prove protons pair up.
> 

In all the history of Chemistry, and believe you me, it has a long and cherished history, but, chemistry has never had a Logical person review the subject of chemistry. Everyone who ever played the game of chemistry in their life, never looked at chemistry with a "logical mind". Ever since I sat in Freshman Chemistry classes at UC, university, 1968 and was taught that the size of the atoms of elements gets smaller as you go from hydrogen to helium, gets smaller as you go from lithium to neon, was a revolt in my logical mind. It never rested as true in my logical mind. There was a calming aspect though in 1968, calming in the fact that as you go down the column of periodic table, the size increases, so, as you go from hydrogen to cesium the size increases, as you go from helium to xenon the size increases. But that still leaves CounterIntuitive as you go from lithium to neon size gets smaller.

So, what can make that Counterintuitive all go away, all disappear and be logical, yes logical? Easy, say the Proton is Chemistry, not electron, so that from hydrogen with its 1/2 torus built, is enlarged with photon emission of electricity, whereas helium is a completed torus, no enlargement. And lithium is half built toruses, so it is enlarged, but by the time you reach oxygen, fluorine and neon, you built all toruses completed them and filled them, producing all the electricity inside the filled neon 2P orbital. That explains, logically why size goes smaller from lithium to neon.

And size also helps explain the PROOFS, the two proofs, with the aid of another truth, the Metals, occupy about 75% of the table, and the Metals are the S, D, and F orbitals. Here again, counterintuitive for we see the metals as being dense, and being dense-- especially osmium iridium, it is counterintuitive that they would be the densest and be metal when the size of the Noble Gases are the smallest size, yet would be larger atomic numbers as Radon, Rn. Logically, Radon should be the densest element and not even a gas, speaking logically. And thus, that is resolved again, by realizing, Chemistry is not about the electron as muon but about the Proton, more so than the electron.

All of these counterintuitive facts, facts we cannot deny, cannot dismiss, all of them disappear when we realize Chemistry is the subject most focused upon protons of atoms, for the protons are the coil in the Faraday Law. Old Chemistry ignored the proton and placed the science upon the behavior of the electron. Of course Old Chemistry was stupid in thinking the electron was the .5MeV particle when truly it is the 105 MeV particle, but that aside, New Chemistry places the Proton as the particle whose behavior is the bulk of the science of Chemistry.

But now, let us prove those two proofs asked for-- (1) each proton has a attendant muon or each muon is tagged with a specific proton (2) it is protons that pair, not electrons= muons and it is protons that follow Hund's rule and Aufbau.

We can prove (1), (2) from simple observation, using (a) atom sizes (b) metals and metal behavior.

(1) Proof that specific proton is attended by specific muon, coil attended by bar magnet. Proof-- metals are dense, meaning mass per volume is larger than a gas atom, lithium is dense metal, whereas neon is gas, yet larger atomic number. And size of lithium is much larger than neon and helium. This implies the 3rd muon of helium is outside and exterior to the 1S orbital of helium. This implies the 1/2 built torus of the 3rd muon of lithium is the 3rd proton and thus, each muon has an attendant proton.

Another proof of (1) is the Rutherford gold foil experiment where the alpha particles bounce back to the alpha gun, having being recoiled by a dense object-- gold atom. A 180 degree recoil of a alpha particle is not where all the protons and neutrons are in a packed together nucleus, but rather, the impact of a alpha particle upon a 1S, or 2S or 2P or 3S, etc torus inside the gold atom, is the cause of the 180 degree recoil, and this allows for the size of say Fe to be smaller than K or Ca atoms. So the recoil of a alpha particle at 180 degrees is not due to a packed small nucleus, but due to a gold atom having many toruses inside a largest torus, and those smaller toruses perpetually going around in a Faraday law and by happenstance a incoming alpha particle collides with a 2S torus or a 2P torus or a 3S torus all of which are inside one another.


(2)Proof that protons are pairing and following Hund's rule and Aufbau.  
Proof-- obviously true for hydrogen for it has 1 muon and 1 proton so they are tagged to one another. Now for helium of its 2 muons, 2 protons. In radioactive decay-- you often see alpha particles-- 2 protons, seldom if ever 1 proton in radioactive decay, meaning the 2 protons are bonded, they come in pairs.

AP

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

30-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// we take the S orbital as a radius & circumference / P orbital of 6 as the 6 sides of cube to do Chemistry bonding Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 09:28 -0700
  30-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// we take the S orbital as a radius & circumference / P orbital of 6 as the 6 sides of cube to do Chemistry bonding Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 11:42 -0700
    Re: 30-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// term "stealing" replaced by "bond" or "bonding" Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 19:35 -0700
      31-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// fun to see how "bond" is defined in Old Chemistry, versus New Chemistry Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 22:09 -0700
        31-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// fun to see how "bond" is defined in Old Chemistry, versus New Chemistry Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 00:52 -0700
          31-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// fun to see how "bond" is defined in Old Chemistry, versus New Chemistry Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 01:12 -0700
            31-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// fun to see how "bond" is defined in Old Chemistry, versus New Chemistry Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 01:39 -0700
              32-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// Centripetal force versus Centrifugal--orbital versus pseudoorbital Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 10:00 -0700
                33-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// since Universe is one big atom of 231Pu, is it a astronomy Coil with thrusting bar magnet? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 10:37 -0700
                Re: 32-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// at maximum, 6 valence muons surrounding a center Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 11:26 -0700
                Re: 32-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// at maximum, 6 valence muons surrounding a center Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 18:00 -0700
                34-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// definition of "Bond" in chemistry; Bond in New Chemistry is a stealing not sharing of valence muons Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 22:08 -0700
                35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// diamagnetism and paramagnetism will reveal where the extra valence muons go into a pseudo-orbital Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 22:50 -0700
                35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// diamagnetism and paramagnetism will reveal where the extra valence muons go into a pseudo-orbital Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 00:08 -0700
                35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// diamagnetism and paramagnetism will reveal where the extra valence muons go into a pseudo-orbital Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 00:12 -0700
                Re: 35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// diamagnetism and paramagnetism will reveal where the extra valence muons go into a pseudo-orbital Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 09:34 -0700
                Re: 35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// diamagnetism and paramagnetism will reveal where the extra valence muons go into a pseudo-orbital Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 09:45 -0700
                Re: 35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// diamagnetism and paramagnetism will reveal where the extra valence muons go into a pseudo-orbital Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 10:40 -0700
                Re: 35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// diamagnetism and paramagnetism will reveal where the extra valence muons go into a pseudo-orbital Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 10:43 -0700
                Re: 35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// diamagnetism and paramagnetism entire field started over Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 11:01 -0700
                Re: 35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// rewriting the theory of diamagnetism and paramagnetism Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 14:58 -0700
                Re: 35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// is charge, geometrically a hook? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 21:16 -0700
                Re: 35-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// is charge, geometrically a hook? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 23:30 -0700
                36-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// Proofs that Chemistry is more about protons than about electrons Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 07:32 -0700
                37-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// redoing over the Rutherford foil experiments and proving him, somewhat wrong Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 09:23 -0700
                37-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// astronomy follows the theory of atoms as torus, for the Ring in third layer Perseus Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 12:37 -0700
                Re: _Burse calls 25 years crazy-- Manfred Einsiedler, Paul Embrechts, Giovanni Felder of ETH, no picture diagram of Calculus proof// still believing proton is 938MeV electron .5MeV when they are 840MeV, 105MeV moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-27 20:24 +0000
                Moroney says-- no manners here--  Charlie Baker, Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin can't do percentages//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 13:38 -0700
                Re: Archimedes Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-27 20:55 +0000
                Re: 37-Maximum Electricity Coil theory// astronomy follows the theory of atoms as torus, for the Ring in third layer Perseus Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 13:45 -0700
                Re: Archimedes Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-25 18:48 +0000

csiph-web