Discussion:
Units in New Physics, and, does Linear Momentum even exist in physics or just a imaginary idealization but no reality// Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-10 04:29:34 UTC
On Monday, September 9, 2019 at 7:30:04 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote in sci.physics:

Units in New Physics // Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition

In New Physics we remake the units. If a concept has electric current in it, already, we leave it alone. If the concept is barren of electric current yet has mass, then we add a electric current to the concept. For example Newton's force law F = ma is incorrect and needs to be F = (i)ma where (i) is electric current. For a concept without mass such as velocity = distance / time there is no electric current. Only concepts with mass and lacking an electric current needs to have the electric current included.

UNITS in New Physics:

electric current = i = A

Angular momentum L = kg*m^2/(A*s) (remember that kg is scalar so that kg*kg is just more kg)

Magnetic Field =  kg /A*s^2

Voltage  = kg*m^2 /A*s^3

velocity or speed = m/s

acceleration = m/s^2

angular momentum =  kg*m^2/(i)s (remember that kg is scalar so that kg*kg is just more kg)

frequency = 1/s

Force = (i)kg*m/s^2

Pressure = (i)kg / m*s^2

Energy = (i)kg*m^2 / s^2

Power, or radiant flux = Energy times frequency, = (i)kg*m^2 / s^3

Quantity of Electricity, Coulomb = C = A*s ( not the silly daffy + or - charge but a wire of monopoles)

Inertia (i)ML^2

Energy = Force x distance = work = (i)ML^2T^-2

Kinetic Energy = 1/2 (i)mv^2 =  1/2 (i)ML^2T^-2

Force = current x mass x acceleration = (i)ma = MLT^-2

velocity = LT^-1

acceleration = LT^-2

energy = (i)ML^2T^-2

force = (i)MLT^-2

frequency = T^-1

linear momentum = (i)MLT^-1 (I doubt linear momentum even exists, it is just broken off piece of Angular Momentum, a segment of Angular Momentum)

Pressure = (i)ML^-1T^-2

Power = (i)ML^2T^-3

Entropy = (i)ML^2T^-2

Magnetic Field =  kg /A*s^2 = kg /C*s

Charge = C = A*s = wire ( not the silly daffy + or - charge, but an actual wire of monopoles)

Voltage  = kg*m^2 /A*s^3 = kg*m^2 /C*s^2

Pressure = (i)kg/m*s^2

Force = (i)kg*m/s^2

Power = (i)kg*m^2/s^3

Resistance = kg*m^2 /A^2*s^3  = kg*m^2 /C *A*s^2

Capacitance = A^2*s^4/ kg*m^2

velocity or speed = m/s

acceleration = m/s^2

angular momentum = kg*m^2/(i)s (remember that kg is scalar so that kg*kg is just more kg)

frequency = 1/s

Force = (i)kg*m/s^2

Pressure = (i)kg / m*s^2

Energy = (i)kg*m^2 / s^2

Power, or radiant flux = Energy times frequency, = (i)kg*m^2 / s^3

Quantity of Electricity, charge, Coulomb = C = A*s

Voltage is the (a) Electric Potential, the (b) Potential Difference and (c) Electromotive Force and all of which has the Units of W/A =  kg*m^2/A*s^3

Capacitance = farad = C/V = A^2*s^4 / kg*m^2

Electrical Resistance = ohm = kg*m^2 /A^2*s^3

Conductance = A/V = A^2*s^3 / kg*m^2

Magnetic Flux = V*s = kg*m^2 /A*s^2

Magnetic Field = tesla = kg /A*s^2

Resistance = kg*m^2/A^2*s^3

Inductance =  kg*m^2 /A^2*s^2

velocity = LT^-1

acceleration = LT^-2

energy = (i)ML^2T^-2

force = (i)MLT^-2

frequency = T^-1

linear momentum = (i)MLT^-1 (I doubt linear momentum even exists, it is just broken off piece of Angular Momentum, a segment of Angular Momentum)

Pressure = (i)ML^-1T^-2

Power = (i)ML^2T^-3

Entropy = (i)ML^2T^-2

Newsgroups: sci.physics
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 20:59:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: I do not think linear momentum ever existed ??? // Raw Research into
ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 03:59:57 +0000

I do not think linear momentum ever existed ??? // Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition

I do not know if Linear Momentum can survive in New Physics. Everything that has electric current must have angular momentum. Even the light wave, the photon has electric current, so even there, the photon has angular momentum not linear.

All of electricity and magnetism is a close circuit, meaning, no linear momentum, rather, angular momentum. Angular Momentum is conserved, not linear, suggesting Linear Momentum is a part segment- a broken off piece of Angular Momentum.
Where is this heading for? It looks like it is heading for the realization that Angular Momentum and Gravity are one and the same.
Is Linear Momentum a total idealization that does not exist?
And where does that leave Linear Momentum? Probably the only thing in Nature with linear momentum is magnetic monopoles of light-photons, but even there, light waves are Voltage field with Magnetic field, that have no rest-mass, so no linear momentum but rather angular momentum. So it may well turn out that Linear Momentum was a bogus concept, a fake concept. A concept that was only in the imagination but never in reality of the Physical World. And that makes sense, in a world where everything is electricity and magnetism, that there exists no linear momentum.

And, looking more and more as though Angular Momentum is the reverse of Gravity, the two are duals of one another. Just as Electricity is dual to Magnetism, if you have one, you have both.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-10 05:05:13 UTC
angular momentum = kg*m^2/(i)s (remember that kg is scalar so that kg*kg is just more kg)

Force = (i)kg*m/s^2

Let us inspect the question of whether Angular Momentum is the reverse of the Force of Gravity. In other words they are duals of one another.

We can dismiss mass kg since they are the same in both, leaving us with:

angular momentum factor m^2/(i)s

and

gravity factor (i)m/s^2

If we take m replacing s and s replacing m then multiply the two together we have

s^2 / (i) m x (i)m/ s^2 = 1 for angular momentum

and

m^2/(i)s x (i)s / m^2 = 1 for gravity

Can we say that angular momentum and gravity are duals of one another? Yes of course, for the math above points that out, quite clearly.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-10 15:13:41 UTC
I am thinking that conjunction is one mechanism, but recently I saw on a NOVA type show, that Jupiter and Saturn wandered around in their neighborhood billions of years ago. What evidence they had for such wandering is problematic to say the least. But suppose wandering by planets is do-able. Then a wandering of Saturn close to Uranus would surely be able to flip the entire set of satellites of Uranus from 0 degrees Sun Equatorial Plane flip those satellites to be 90 degrees and perpendicular to the Sun's Equatorial Plane.

I wrote this in plutonium-atom-universe newsgroup:
the mechanism of EM flipping the Uranus planet+ satellites to a 90 degree axis tilt by Conjunction // Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition

Alright as the days pass, this mechanism is becoming clearer in my mind.

A conjunction of planets is when they line up. Now I need to find out how many millions if not billions of years ago that Sun, Jupiter Saturn and Uranus, possibly Neptune all line up? Is that a millions of years frequency or a billions of years frequency.

And here is the vision of the mechanism:

N

_U_
.-'               `-.
.'             S          `.
/               J            \
;                                 ;
|                Sun         |
;                                ;
\                              /
`.                        .'
`-  .  _____   .-'

Now it may take all the planets in conjunction to make Uranus axis and its satellites flip from a 0 degree orbit into a 90 degree perpendicular orbit to Sun's Equatorial Plane.

Think of Saturn and its Rings and Satellites today are a 0 degree tilt in axis and rings and satellites, and that Uranus is a 90 degree tilt with axis parallel to Solar Equatorial Plane and satellites at 90 degrees

So in a conjunction the electric current flow through all those lined up planets would be like a booster current for Uranus.

Think of the satellites as a hair strand and the hairs are lying 0 degrees. Then the conjunction comes along and a booster flow of electric current through those planets is like making the hairs "stand up". So before the conjunction Uranus axis was perpendicular to Plane and satellites were parallel to plane. After conjunction Uranus axis was parallel to Plane and satellites were perpendicular (standing up) to Plane.

It is easy to visualize that electricity can do this, especially over such a long distance, but realizing that EM force is 10^40 stronger of a force than gravity alone, we easily can picture how electricity would change the entire orbit of Uranus.

So how frequent are conjunctions? In millions of years or in billions of years??

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-10 16:27:37 UTC
deriving both the Newton's gravity law and the Coulomb law from a term in AP's EM Equations // Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
I am thinking that conjunction is one mechanism, but recently I saw on a NOVA type show, that Jupiter and Saturn wandered around in their neighborhood billions of years ago. What evidence they had for such wandering is problematic to say the least. But suppose wandering by planets is do-able. Then a wandering of Saturn close to Uranus would surely be able to flip the entire set of satellites of Uranus from 0 degrees Sun Equatorial Plane flip those satellites to be 90 degrees and perpendicular to the Sun's Equatorial Plane.
Someone asked what this NOVA show was?

I recall a program of all the planets in the Solar System and they said that Jupiter was encroaching upon the Asteroid belt and preventing that belt from forming a planet. But then Saturn was moving towards Jupiter and hauling back in Jupiter into its present day orbit.

I bet, am not sure that all of that is mere opinion and speculation with not one iota or shred of evidence. So much of physics these days is worthless opinion.

But if true, that in 4 billion years ago, the Jupiter and Saturn were moving around in their orbits, that a Saturn that moved closer to Uranus, has the electricity and magnetism to lift the entire satellites of Uranus to be perpendicular to the Sun's Equatorial Plane and causing present day Uranus to have a axis parallel to that Plane.

Keep in mind, Gravity is electricity and magnetism, and Uranus proves that fact. Do not bring the bozo clown idea that Newton's gravity or General Relativity, for Uranus proves Newton's gravity and General Relativity are utter nonsense.

Which reminds me, that today I need to derive Newton's inverse square law of gravity along with Coulomb's inverse square law, derive both from Angular Momentum law of the AP-EM Equations.

Derive them from the equation L' = (V/iB)' = 1/i  -  V/i*B - V^2/ i*B^2

Which really should be easy, overall, because just looking at the last term - V^2/ i*B^2

We can see a inverse square from the B^2 and we can make out that the V^2 the voltage squared is the mass_1 x mass_2 in Newton's gravity and is the charge_1 x charge_2 in Coulomb's electricity law.

So, both Newton's gravity and Coulomb's law come out of a single term in one of AP's EM Equations.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-10 18:17:53 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
deriving both the Newton's gravity law and the Coulomb law from a term in AP's EM Equations // Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
The AP-EM Equations of Physics are:

V= voltage, B= magnetic field, i = A= electric current, L = angular-momentum

1) Magnetic primal unit law Magnetic Field  B = kg /A*s^2
2) V = iBL   this is New Ohm's law
3) V' = (iBL)' this is a law Maxwell missed and is Capacitor Law, also gives us AC
4) B' = (V/iL)' this is Ampere-Maxwell law
5) i' = (V/BL)' this is Faraday law
6) L' = (V/iB)' this is another law missed by Maxwell, it gives us angular momentum and gravity

Three of the 6 laws are division and two have a term in them that can be seen as Newton's gravity law or as Coulomb's Law.

(V/i*L)'  = B'  Ampere law

Using the Quotient Rule, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/(gh)^2

(V/i*L)' = (V'*i*L - V*i' *L - V*i*L') / (i*L)^2

Using the Quotient Rule, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/g*h^2

(V/B*L)' = (V'*B*L - V*B' *L - V*B*L') / (B*L)^2 where derivative L is L

B^2*L/B^2*L^2  - V^2*L / B^2*L^2 - V*B*L/B^2*L^2

= 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - V/B*L

(V/i*B)'  = L'  Gravity law both revolution and rotation

Using the Quotient Rule, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/g*h^2

(V/i*B)' = (V'*i*B - V*i' *B - V*i*B') / (i*B)^2

B^2*i/ i^2*B^2 - V*i*B/i^2*B^2 - V^2*i/i^2*B^2

1/i    -  V/i*B - V^2/ i*B^2

The Faraday Law has i' = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - V/B*L and the term - V^2/B^2*L can be seen as either Coulomb's law where B^2 is inverse square of distance and V^2 seen as charge_1 x charge_2. Or, seen as Newton's gravity where V^2 is seen as mass_1 x mass_2 and B^2 seen as inverse square of distance.

The Angular Momentum Law has i' = 1/i    -  V/i*B - V^2/ i*B^2 and the term - V^2/i*B^2 can be seen as either Coulomb's law where B^2 is inverse square of distance and V^2 seen as charge_1 x charge_2. Or, seen as Newton's gravity where V^2 is seen as mass_1 x mass_2 and B^2 seen as inverse square of distance.

Now this is good news for it reinforces our understanding that the Newton gravity and the Coulomb law are mathematically the same form.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-10 19:39:38 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
deriving both the Newton's gravity law and the Coulomb law from a term in AP's EM Equations // Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
V= voltage, B= magnetic field, i = A= electric current, L = angular-momentum
1) Magnetic primal unit law Magnetic Field  B = kg /A*s^2
2) V = iBL   this is New Ohm's law
3) V' = (iBL)' this is a law Maxwell missed and is Capacitor Law, also gives us AC
4) B' = (V/iL)' this is Ampere-Maxwell law
5) i' = (V/BL)' this is Faraday law
6) L' = (V/iB)' this is another law missed by Maxwell, it gives us angular momentum and gravity
Alright, apart from the first law which is a primal unit equation, the other laws are full Equations.

Now in Old Physics, they were rather dumb about what is a law and what is not a law of physics. Because for them, usually they had constants in their make-believe-laws. Their Newton gravity had the Gravitational constant denoted by G.

Their Coulomb law had the electrostatic constant.

Should a valid true law of physics have constants at all???
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Three of the 6 laws are division and two have a term in them that can be seen as Newton's gravity law or as Coulomb's Law.
(V/i*L)'  = B'  Ampere law
Using the Quotient Rule, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/(gh)^2
(V/i*L)' = (V'*i*L - V*i' *L - V*i*L') / (i*L)^2
Using the Quotient Rule, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/g*h^2
(V/B*L)' = (V'*B*L - V*B' *L - V*B*L') / (B*L)^2 where derivative L is L
B^2*L/B^2*L^2  - V^2*L / B^2*L^2 - V*B*L/B^2*L^2
= 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - V/B*L
(V/i*B)'  = L'  Gravity law both revolution and rotation
Using the Quotient Rule, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/g*h^2
(V/i*B)' = (V'*i*B - V*i' *B - V*i*B') / (i*B)^2
B^2*i/ i^2*B^2 - V*i*B/i^2*B^2 - V^2*i/i^2*B^2
1/i    -  V/i*B - V^2/ i*B^2
The Faraday Law has i' = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - V/B*L and the term - V^2/B^2*L can be seen as either Coulomb's law where B^2 is inverse square of distance and V^2 seen as charge_1 x charge_2. Or, seen as Newton's gravity where V^2 is seen as mass_1 x mass_2 and B^2 seen as inverse square of distance.
The Angular Momentum Law has i' = 1/i    -  V/i*B - V^2/ i*B^2 and the term - V^2/i*B^2 can be seen as either Coulomb's law where B^2 is inverse square of distance and V^2 seen as charge_1 x charge_2. Or, seen as Newton's gravity where V^2 is seen as mass_1 x mass_2 and B^2 seen as inverse square of distance.
Now this is good news for it reinforces our understanding that the Newton gravity and the Coulomb law are mathematically the same form.
I am going to argue that the true valid laws of physics are Equations, and that being an equation, it is ludicrous to have constants. That means the true law is some equation far away and that Newton's gravity was a segmented portion of some equation unknown to Newton. Same goes for Coulomb and his purported law. Because it has a constant, means it was torn off of some equation that is the true law.

So whenever in physics some calls a law a law of physics and it has a constant in it, means it is a fractional part of a Equation and the equation is the true law of physics.

As we can see above, the Newton Gravity law is just a term of Faraday law or of Angular Momentum law. And we can thus see, that since it is a fragment of an equation, that you need constants, constants here and there to make-up for the fact that you ripped off a term of a larger equation. The law of gravity and the law of Coulomb are really equations, and equations that need no constants.

The full equation of L' = 1/i    -  V/i*B - V^2/ i*B^2 is the law of gravity and the full equation of

i' = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - V/B*L is Coulomb's law

And if you want to rip out a single term in those equations and call it a law, then of course, you are going to need side-dressing of a constant because you are going to ignore the other terms of the equation.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-10 20:33:19 UTC
You see in Old Physics the Maxwell Equations — the correct ones were laws of physics. But anything else that required a constant was not a law but a fragmented bit and piece of a equation that was the law.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-10 22:05:28 UTC
At first guess it is term in Faraday law of AP-EM equations of 1/L or the term 1/i in Angular Momentum law.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-10 23:18:36 UTC
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 3:33:22 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
real true laws of physics need no constants-- for their equation is the full law, not a segmented portion of a equation // Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition

You see in Old Physics the Maxwell Equations — the correct ones were laws of physics. But anything else that required a constant was not a law but a fragmented bit and piece of a equation that was the law.

On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 5:05:31 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
What is Planck’s constant in New Physics // Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
At first guess it is term in Faraday law of AP-EM equations of 1/L or the term 1/i in Angular Momentum law.
Well the Planck's constant is in the form of Angular Momentum so it is a good guess that the term in 1/L in Faraday law of AP's EM Equations is Planck's constant.

It is very difficult to see that Planck's constant is found in Faraday's Law. But there it is, nonetheless.

And, Planck's constant is 4.14*10^-15 eV*s

The Faraday law in AP's EM Equations is i' = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - V/B*L

And the term 1/L becomes 4.14*10^-15 eV*s divided into 1 for a value of 2.4*10^14

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-11 00:06:01 UTC
Now Planck’s constant in terms of joules is 10^-34 which is the energy of a single photon but inverted 1/ 10^-34 is 10^34 joules, the amount of total output of Sun in a year. Just as a perspective.
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-11 02:07:09 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Now Planck’s constant in terms of joules is 10^-34 which is the energy of a single photon but inverted 1/ 10^-34 is 10^34 joules, the amount of total output of Sun in a year. Just as a perspective.
Now in a earlier chapter of this book, we learned the true definition of angular momentum has a electric current term in it.

In Old Physics they had angular momentum units as Angular Momentum units = kg*m^2/s

In New Physics we do not miss the missing term of electric current (i)

Angular Momentum units = kg*m^2/(i)*s

And, what that does is invalidates Old Physics idea that Planck's constant was a constant, when in truth it is a variable. The measurement of Planck's constant by physicists very much depends on their location in Space. So that a measurement of Planck's constant in the Solar System with our Sun, will end up with 6.63*10^-34 J*s where that is the average smallest energy photon of the Sun and compared to 10^34 Joules which is the total amount of photons per year emitted by the Sun.

If our star had been a hotter star than the Sun, then Planck's constant in that Star System may have been 10^-37 rather than 10^-34.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-11 05:37:18 UTC
Alright, I am going to have to get out my old pith ball stands of pith balls and experiment in seeing how to make the ball rise, rather than swing away.

The planet Uranus was like Saturn except without that huge ring. Like Saturn with satellites orbiting in Solar Equatorial Plane and axis of Saturn perpendicular to Plane. But then some EM force completely lifted Uranus and all its satellites to be perpendicular to the Solar Equatorial Plane, and for the axis of Uranus to be parallel to the Plane.

So I need to do some experiments to try to solve how Uranus was lifted by EM force.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-11 07:18:41 UTC
Tried the pith ball. Too chaotic. I need a mechanism that is smooth and includes 10 or more satellites.

The only smooth mechanism is a Conjunction of the gas giants. But not a conjunction that does the lifting in one conjunction but rather lifts by a tiny amount. We have roughly 4 billion years. Conjunctions take place every 200 years roughly. Uranus is tilted 90 degrees.

So divide 200 into 4,000,000,000 is 20,000,000 is 20 million times Uranus had conjunction. Divide 90 by 20 million is 4.5*10^-6 or .0000045 of a degree off on each conjunction.

When is the next gas giant conjunction and do we have instruments capable of measuring to a precision of .0000045 degree off?? I suspect not.

Every time the gas giants have a conjunction, Uranus and its satellites are thrown off that tiny degree.

But perhaps we can test this idea with the rings of Saturn since it is more observable.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-11 14:28:04 UTC
There is likely no measuring instruments that can deliver accuracy of .0000045 degrees of tilting Uranus satellites from Gas Giant conjunctions, all due to the fact that Gravity is EM. We can see this as cosmic erosion, just as trying to measure the erosion of a mountain range.

Our instruments are not delicate enough to measure let alone observe events that occur every 200 years.

But, what can be done now is to show that the conjunction of the inner planets upon Venus gives Venus a -243 day retrograde rotation.

If I can link together the mathematics that Conjunctions cause Venus -243day rotation and 90 degree axis tilt Uranus and its satellites, if the math works out on both, then that is sufficient evidence to say Conjunctions are the cause of these two features, all due to the fact that gravity is electricity-magnetism.

Conjunctions are inevitable in many body orbits and during conjunctions, the electricity magnetism becomes focal to extreme electricity magnetism. So focal that it flips on its side a entire planet with its satellites and causes one planet to have a retrograde rotation longer than its orbit.

We can view conjunctions as sort of Solar System erosion.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-11 21:04:16 UTC
Post by Archimedes Plutonium
There is likely no measuring instruments that can deliver accuracy of .0000045 degrees of tilting Uranus satellites from Gas Giant conjunctions, all due to the fact that Gravity is EM. We can see this as cosmic erosion, just as trying to measure the erosion of a mountain range.
Our instruments are not delicate enough to measure let alone observe events that occur every 200 years.
But, what can be done now is to show that the conjunction of the inner planets upon Venus gives Venus a -243 day retrograde rotation.
If I can link together the mathematics that Conjunctions cause Venus -243day rotation and 90 degree axis tilt Uranus and its satellites, if the math works out on both, then that is sufficient evidence to say Conjunctions are the cause of these two features, all due to the fact that gravity is electricity-magnetism.
Conjunctions are inevitable in many body orbits and during conjunctions, the electricity magnetism becomes focal to extreme electricity magnetism. So focal that it flips on its side a entire planet with its satellites and causes one planet to have a retrograde rotation longer than its orbit.
We can view conjunctions as sort of Solar System erosion.
This would be a pretty link up of math-- between a lifting of satellites of Uranus above Sun equatorial plane and the retrograde motion of Venus rotation. Think of it as Solar System erosion by electricity magnetism.
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-12 01:02:31 UTC
Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Warning to any reader. This research book is advanced and unless you know a lot of physics and math, you be advised that much is difficult to read.

No-one in the 20th century of physics understood what Angular Momentum truly was. Two of the best and finest mathematical physicists Dirac and Feynman missed understanding what Angular Momentum was. I say that because both believed you could have a electron at .5 MeV with proton at 938 MeV and have a hydrogen atom. When you fail at knowing what Angular Momentum is and what it is all about, then you will fail in realizing the true electron of atoms is the muon at 105 MeV and the true proton of atoms is 840 MeV, so that the muon and proton conduct Faraday's law inside of a hydrogen atom, or any atom for that sake.

Cover Picture is my handwritten like blackboard writing of the AP-EM Equations. Those equations get at the heart of what Angular Momentum means. And if you have no idea of what that math is, you be advised that this book is too difficult for you.
Length: 123 pages
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-12 02:06:20 UTC
Atom Totality Universe: Atom Totality Series book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Physics book that explains what the universe is, and how it works. This is a continuation of the Atomic Theory by Democritus in Ancient Greek times. It adds one more fact to the Atomic Theory. That the Universe itself is one gigantic big atom. It completes the logic of science that Dr. Feynman wrote-- all things are made up of atoms -- and so, to complete that idea -- all things and the universe itself is an atom.
Length: 617 pages

Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, Atom Totality Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Cover picture: is what the interior and exterior of most atoms looks like once you apply Faraday's Law to subatomic particles.This picture is a coil of 88 rings torus with a smaller ring inside. The 88 coil rings represent 11 protons in a Faraday Law magnetic induction coil and the smaller ring is a muon as a bar magnet thrusting through the proton coil, thereby, producing electricity.

The goal and aim of the 8th edition of Atom Totality, 2017 was to iron out all the mathematics of Electricity and Magnetism so that the AP-Maxwell Equations embodied all the mathematics of physics. In other words, all of physics is handled by the AP-Maxwell Equations. But in the course of straightening out the EM math of physics, I made my second greatest science discovery-- that the real proton was 840MeV, real electron was the muon at 105MeV and that little particle we all thought was the electron since JJ Thompson discovered it in 1897, was in fact not the electron but was Dirac's magnetic monopole. I made that discovery in the midst of my writing the 8th edition (only goes to show that most of our best ideas come from organizing and placing our thoughts into order-- writing a book). And so this 9th edition goal and aim is to go back and fix the picture of atoms, their geometry, and incorporate that discovery, mostly by fixing the picture of what atoms exterior and interior geometry is, in light of the fact that there is the Faraday Law going on inside of atoms.
Length: 115 pages

Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Warning to any reader. This research book is advanced and unless you know a lot of physics and math, you be advised that much is difficult to read.

No-one in the 20th century of physics understood what Angular Momentum truly was. Two of the best and finest mathematical physicists Dirac and Feynman missed understanding what Angular Momentum was. I say that because both believed you could have a electron at .5 MeV with proton at 938 MeV and have a hydrogen atom. When you fail at knowing what Angular Momentum is and what it is all about, then you will fail in realizing the true electron of atoms is the muon at 105 MeV and the true proton of atoms is 840 MeV, so that the muon and proton conduct Faraday's law inside of a hydrogen atom, or any atom for that sake.

Cover Picture is my handwritten like blackboard writing of the AP-EM Equations. Those equations get at the heart of what Angular Momentum means. And if you have no idea of what that math is, you be advised that this book is too difficult for you.
Length: 123 pages
Archimedes Plutonium
2019-09-12 06:06:51 UTC
Atom Totality Universe: Atom Totality Series book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Physics book that explains what the universe is, and how it works. This is a continuation of the Atomic Theory by Democritus in Ancient Greek times. It adds one more fact to the Atomic Theory. That the Universe itself is one gigantic big atom. It completes the logic of science that Dr. Feynman wrote-- all things are made up of atoms -- and so, to complete that idea -- all things and the universe itself is an atom.
Length: 617 pages

Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, Atom Totality Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Cover picture: is what the interior and exterior of most atoms looks like once you apply Faraday's Law to subatomic particles.This picture is a coil of 88 rings torus with a smaller ring inside. The 88 coil rings represent 11 protons in a Faraday Law magnetic induction coil and the smaller ring is a muon as a bar magnet thrusting through the proton coil, thereby, producing electricity.

The goal and aim of the 8th edition of Atom Totality, 2017 was to iron out all the mathematics of Electricity and Magnetism so that the AP-Maxwell Equations embodied all the mathematics of physics. In other words, all of physics is handled by the AP-Maxwell Equations. But in the course of straightening out the EM math of physics, I made my second greatest science discovery-- that the real proton was 840MeV, real electron was the muon at 105MeV and that little particle we all thought was the electron since JJ Thompson discovered it in 1897, was in fact not the electron but was Dirac's magnetic monopole. I made that discovery in the midst of my writing the 8th edition (only goes to show that most of our best ideas come from organizing and placing our thoughts into order-- writing a book). And so this 9th edition goal and aim is to go back and fix the picture of atoms, their geometry, and incorporate that discovery, mostly by fixing the picture of what atoms exterior and interior geometry is, in light of the fact that there is the Faraday Law going on inside of atoms.
Length: 115 pages

Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Warning to any reader. This research book is advanced and unless you know a lot of physics and math, you be advised that much is difficult to read.

No-one in the 20th century of physics understood what Angular Momentum truly was. Two of the best and finest mathematical physicists Dirac and Feynman missed understanding what Angular Momentum was. I say that because both believed you could have a electron at .5 MeV with proton at 938 MeV and have a hydrogen atom. When you fail at knowing what Angular Momentum is and what it is all about, then you will fail in realizing the true electron of atoms is the muon at 105 MeV and the true proton of atoms is 840 MeV, so that the muon and proton conduct Faraday's law inside of a hydrogen atom, or any atom for that sake.

Cover Picture is my handwritten like blackboard writing of the AP-EM Equations. Those equations get at the heart of what Angular Momentum means. And if you have no idea of what that math is, you be advised that this book is too difficult for you.
Length: 123 pages