AP's 190th book of science// Day in the life of the King of Science-- reflections on Nature
21k views
Subscribe

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 14, 2022, 2:03:10 AM

Good to be alive. Was thinking today that a better announcement on the telephone when someone calls
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 14, 2022, 2:25:49 AM

On Saturday, May 14, 2022 at 2:03:10 AM UTC-5 Archimedes Plutonium wrote: Good to be alive. Was
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 14, 2022, 5:13:41 PM

Yes, sorry, I am way way too tired to tackle more physics and math. For AP, King of Science, I get
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 24, 2022, 1:40:36 AM (5 days ago)

AP needs a long long vacation, from physics and math. And as soon as I finish and publish my 188th
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 26, 2022, 12:29:39 AM (3 days ago)

Yes, I am very tired and need that vacation which starts once the 188th book of science is published,
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 27, 2022, 1:26:22 AM (2 days ago)

Thank goodness I finished publishing my 188th book of science. I am calling for a vacation, the first
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 28, 2022, 2:20:27 PM (yesterday)

Beautiful day today, and I am reminded by that English photographer who did a NATURE program on wild
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
May 28, 2022, 11:32:10 PM (15 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
Alright, I am in vacation mode-- meaning that I will spend the entire summer and autumn writing only biology books. The physics books I wrote last winter drained me so much of energy. I need to revitalize. It is the first time in my life I have needed a vacation. I have always been hyperactive in all activities. It is probably due to my age at 72 years now. So I will write biology books, and the current one that I am working on is the evolution of legs for motion.

I am bracing myself for the drought this summer and the signs are self evident today of 28May because my lilac bushes are wilting, and it is not even summer yet. So that portends a worse drought than even 2021.

And today was transplanting strawberries into pots. I can no longer tolerate the weeds and grasses in strawberries. Pots are the only feasible way. In one hand held a watering hose to the strawberries and with the other hand weeded the grasses.

This maybe the first year that my pond fed by artesian well almost dries out. I still have wild ducks back there.

Looking at the weather forecast, no predication of rain above 50% chance for the next 10 days.

So drought is upon us.

At least I installed the air conditioner today. So although my plants are suffering, I am in comfort.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
2:27 PM (now)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
Well, it is just 1 week into AP's vacation from physics and math, and would you not know it. He is right back smack dab into doing physics and math.

I am helpless in preventing it.

I was reading several science magazines and the topic of Sun cycles of 22 years with 11 years of flipping North to South and back again. All because the Sun is fluid motion.

So here, in a vacation away from physics and math, it only took 1 week and I am right back at it, even though I wanted to get away from it.

Sun cycles asks the question of "Can the Sun be fusion powered since it has these cycles?" Or, is the Sun powered by Faraday law in order to have this pattern of 22 and 11 years for cycling the poles North to South and back again?

I believe the answer is clear, that electricity is produced in Faraday law not fusion and these cycles are electrical magnetic. So it is a simple proof that Sun shines from Faraday law, not fusion because as evidentiary proof-- the 11 and 22 year cycles.

That would predict that the gas giants rotate rapidly whereas rocky planets rotate more slowly.

Rotation period
Mercury 58.6 days
Venus -243.0 days
Earth 23 hours 56 minutes
Moon 27.3 days
Mars 24 hours 37 minutes
Jupiter 9 hours 55 minutes
Saturn 10 hours 32 minutes
Uranus -17 hours 14 minutes
Neptune 16 hours 6 minutes
Pluto -6 days 9 hours

What I am going to do is write up my physics work in this book and later collect it and assemble it to fit into existing books. I am too tired of making another physics book until Winter of 2022.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe  
Archimedes Plutonium

Alright, my last book published 188th was about translating and converting Language to a math formula or equation. And it appears here is another opportunity.
>
> Rotation period
> Mercury 58.6 days
> Venus -243.0 days
> Earth 23 hours 56 minutes
> Moon 27.3 days
> Mars 24 hours 37 minutes
> Jupiter 9 hours 55 minutes
> Saturn 10 hours 32 minutes
> Uranus -17 hours 14 minutes
> Neptune 16 hours 6 minutes
> Pluto -6 days 9 hours
>

I need the Sun rotation period which is 27 days, almost the same as Moon.

So in writing this formula, I need to separate the planets with no satellites from the ones with satellites. Because satellites speed up the rotation.

Sun 27 days = 648 hours
Earth 24 hours
Mars 24 hours
Jupiter 10 hours
Saturn 10.5 hours
Uranus 17 hours
Neptune 16 hours
Pluto 6 days 9 hours

no satellites
Mercury 58.6 days
Venus 243 days

So we see a Conjecture or Speculation here. We see that spin rotation is caused by electricity and magnetism of the parent body and as this electricity and magnetism inhabit the outer surface of the body, the electrical and magnetic forces push the body into a spin rotation.

In Old Physics, it was thought a internal dynamo was required for spin rotation. Here, instead, all that is needed is a mass for a body because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every proton of that body, creating new electricity and magnetism.

So in the above, we factor mass of body with rotation period times some constant should give a formula of all astro bodies in the Solar System.

AP

On Sunday, May 29, 2022 at 10:57:16 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Alright, my last book published 188th was about translating and converting Language to a math formula or equation. And it appears here is another opportunity.
> >
> > Rotation period
> > Mercury 58.6 days
> > Venus -243.0 days
> > Earth 23 hours 56 minutes
> > Moon 27.3 days
> > Mars 24 hours 37 minutes
> > Jupiter 9 hours 55 minutes
> > Saturn 10 hours 32 minutes
> > Uranus -17 hours 14 minutes
> > Neptune 16 hours 6 minutes
> > Pluto -6 days 9 hours
> >
> I need the Sun rotation period which is 27 days, almost the same as Moon.
>
> So in writing this formula, I need to separate the planets with no satellites from the ones with satellites. Because satellites speed up the rotation.
>
> Sun 27 days = 648 hours, mass is 332,950 times Earth
> Earth 24 hours
> Mars 24 hours, mass is 0.1 of Earth
> Jupiter 10 hours, mass is 318 times Earth
> Saturn 10.5 hours, mass is 95 times Earth
> Uranus 17 hours, mass is 14.5 times Earth
> Neptune 16 hours, mass is 17 times Earth
> Pluto 6 days 9 hours, mass is 0.002 of Earth
>
>
> no satellites
> Mercury 58.6 days, mass is 0.81 of Earth
> Venus 243 days, mass is 0.81 of Earth

Neat that the mass of Mercury is almost identical to mass of Venus.

So here, I am tasked in finding a formula that relates spin rotation with the mass of the object. All because of electricity and magnetism produced by the body causes electrical forces to harbor on the surface and push the astro object in a spin rotation.

AP

On Sunday, May 29, 2022 at 11:37:54 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Sunday, May 29, 2022 at 10:57:16 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > Alright, my last book published 188th was about translating and converting Language to a math formula or equation. And it appears here is another opportunity.
> > >
> > > Rotation period
> > > Mercury 58.6 days
> > > Venus -243.0 days
> > > Earth 23 hours 56 minutes
> > > Moon 27.3 days
> > > Mars 24 hours 37 minutes
> > > Jupiter 9 hours 55 minutes
> > > Saturn 10 hours 32 minutes
> > > Uranus -17 hours 14 minutes
> > > Neptune 16 hours 6 minutes
> > > Pluto -6 days 9 hours
> > >
> > I need the Sun rotation period which is 27 days, almost the same as Moon.
> >
> > So in writing this formula, I need to separate the planets with no satellites from the ones with satellites. Because satellites speed up the rotation.
> >
> > Sun 27 days = 648 hours, mass is 332,950 times Earth
> > Earth 24 hours
> > Mars 24 hours, mass is 0.1 of Earth
> > Jupiter 10 hours, mass is 318 times Earth
> > Saturn 10.5 hours, mass is 95 times Earth
> > Uranus 17 hours, mass is 14.5 times Earth
> > Neptune 16 hours, mass is 17 times Earth
> > Pluto 6 days 9 hours, mass is 0.002 of Earth
> >
> >
> > no satellites
> > Mercury 58.6 days, mass is 0.81 of Earth
> > Venus 243 days, mass is 0.81 of Earth
>
> Neat that the mass of Mercury is almost identical to mass of Venus.
>
> So here, I am tasked in finding a formula that relates spin rotation with the mass of the object. All because of electricity and magnetism produced by the body causes electrical forces to harbor on the surface and push the astro object in a spin rotation.

Alright, I may have something here before I go to bed. And it is always nice to have something sleeping and in dreams to wake up to the next day.

I noticed that the moon is almost the same as the Sun in 27 days rotation. So if I multiply moon x Earth spin I get the Sun spin of 648 hours.

So, can that same trick work on say Jupiter? Only Jupiter has many more satellites than does Earth.

So that Ganymede, the largest is 7 days spin rotation. Europa has a 3.5 days. Callisto has 16.6 days, Io has 1.7 days.

But Jupiter has 80 satellites. And what I need is a addition of all those rotation periods to see if it adds up to 64.8 days. For then I can relate Earth with its moon as 27 x 24 = 648 and relate Jupiter and its satellites as 64.8 x 10 = 648. If those Jupiter satellites do add up to 64.8 days then that is not a coincidence, but stems from the electrical and magnetic properties of astro bodies.

AP

No that is a arithmetic mistake by me. So I need 10/24 = 0.41 days spin for Jupiter and to equal 27 days for Sun spin I add up the four largest satellites of Jupiter.

I noticed that the moon is almost the same as the Sun in 27 days rotation. So if I multiply moon x Earth spin I get the Sun spin of 648 hours or in days as 27
So, can that same trick work on say Jupiter? Only Jupiter has many more satellites than does Earth.
So that Ganymede, the largest is 7 days spin rotation. Europa has a 3.5 days. Callisto has 16.6 days, Io has 1.7 days. Adding that up is 28.8. Not bad, and I accept it as close enough to 27. In this calculation we can regard the other 76 satellites as irrelevant.
So, now, tomorrow let me see if Saturn and others come close enough.

AP

Sun 27 days = 648 hours, mass is 332,950 times Earth
Earth 24 hours
Mars 24 hours, mass is 0.1 of Earth
Jupiter 10 hours, mass is 318 times Earth
Saturn 10.5 hours, mass is 95 times Earth
Uranus 17 hours, mass is 14.5 times Earth
Neptune 16 hours, mass is 17 times Earth
Pluto 6 days 9 hours, mass is 0.002 of Earth

no satellites
Mercury 58.6 days, mass is 0.81 of Earth
Venus 243 days, mass is 0.81 of Earth

Now looking at Mercury and Venus and looking at the Sun. Now the Sun is a satellite system but Mercury and Venus are non-satellites.

So the theory to AP is that a satellite system speeds up the rotation of the astro body. If no satellite, the spin rotation is slow.

And so the Sun is a 27 day spin rotation. What would the Sun spin rotation be if it had no planets? Would it be 270 days spin? Would it be 2700 days spin rotation?

If we look at Mercury it is about 2 x 27 days. And that Venus is approximately 10 x 27 days.

I am going to have to look at the AP equations of Electricity and Magnetism (the old Maxwell Equations revised by AP) to look for clues.

Both Mercury and Venus have the same mass, which probably in all likelihood is that caused by the AP EM equations, and not a coincidence. Their distance from the Sun is not the factor of 2 then 10. However, if we look at Earth and Mars, they spin rotate the same 24 hours and Mars is 1/10 the mass of Earth. So this is a clue to the factor of 10 in Venus.

AP, King of Science, -- especially Physics-Chemistry

On Monday, May 30, 2022 at 2:17:42 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Sun 27 days = 648 hours, mass is 332,950 times Earth
> Earth 24 hours
> Mars 24 hours, mass is 0.1 of Earth
> Jupiter 10 hours, mass is 318 times Earth
> Saturn 10.5 hours, mass is 95 times Earth
> Uranus 17 hours, mass is 14.5 times Earth
> Neptune 16 hours, mass is 17 times Earth
> Pluto 6 days 9 hours, mass is 0.002 of Earth
>

Now I cannot help but notice that the Gas Giants have numerous satellites, and we must ask the question that if Sun has 9 planets and the Gas Giants all have at least 9 satellites, some like Jupiter having 80.

And what broke up the Asteroid belt was that it was just not a mechanically favorable orbit and EM gravity broke up the Gas Giant object that used to be in that orbit.

But I cannot help but notice that 2 times the mass of Jupiter is about equal to 648 hours for period of spin of the Sun.
This factor of 2 is noticed in Mercury as 58.6 days is almost the same as 2 times 27 days is 54.

So I am seeing these two factors of 2 and of 10. And that cannot be coincidence but stemming from the fact that all of Solar System mechanics comes directly from the AP EM equations (formerly called the Maxwell Equations).

> no satellites
> Mercury 58.6 days, mass is 0.81 of Earth
> Venus 243 days, mass is 0.81 of Earth
> Now looking at Mercury and Venus and looking at the Sun. Now the Sun is a satellite system but Mercury and Venus are non-satellites.
>
> So the theory to AP is that a satellite system speeds up the rotation of the astro body. If no satellite, the spin rotation is slow.
>
> And so the Sun is a 27 day spin rotation. What would the Sun spin rotation be if it had no planets? Would it be 270 days spin? Would it be 2700 days spin rotation?
>
> If we look at Mercury it is about 2 x 27 days. And that Venus is approximately 10 x 27 days.
>
> I am going to have to look at the AP equations of Electricity and Magnetism (the old Maxwell Equations revised by AP) to look for clues.
>
> Both Mercury and Venus have the same mass, which probably in all likelihood is that caused by the AP EM equations, and not a coincidence. Their distance from the Sun is not the factor of 2 then 10. However, if we look at Earth and Mars, they spin rotate the same 24 hours and Mars is 1/10 the mass of Earth. So this is a clue to the factor of 10 in Venus.
>
> AP, King of Science, -- especially Physics-Chemistry

Alright these are the 6 AP EM laws of physics (formerly known as the Maxwell Equations but Maxwell Equations are riddled full of mistakes and errors.

Those 6 laws are these.

1) Magnetic monopole telling us what magnetism and electric current and magnetic field and electric field are.

2) New Ohm's law Voltage = capacitor-battery = quantity of current C times magnetic field times electric field. V= CBE. The equation of New Ohm's law is a math equation of volume Volume = length x width x height so we can expect that New Ohm's law is a measuring of volume in physics, volume of energy.

The next 4 laws are derivatives of all the possible 4 permutations of C, B, E, and V.

3) Rate of change of C, quantity current, C' = (V/(BE))' Faraday law.

4) Rate of change of B, magnetic field, B' = (V/(CE))' Ampere-Maxwell law..

5) Rate of change of E, electric field, E' = (V/(CB))' Coulomb law & gravity.

6) The rate of change of V= CBE as V' = (CBE)' as AC transformer law.

I need to start with those 6 laws and on units of electromagnetism and the definition of magnetic monopoles that composes electricity, and photon light-waves, and neutrinos.

Units

V = voltage
A = ampere current
s = seconds
C = Coulomb, amount of electricity = A*s
B = Magnetic field
E = Electric field
m = meters
kg = kilogram mass

More Units

Angular momentum L =  kg*m^2/s

Pressure = kg/(m*s^2)

Action = kg*m^2/s where angular momentum = action and resembling both magnetic field and electric field but not equal to them.

Current = A, where the A represents Ampere

Quantity of Current = C = A*s where the C represents Coulomb

Magnetic Field B = m^2/ A*s^2 = m^2/ C*s

Electric Field is E = m^2/ A*s^2 = m^2/ C*s

Voltage = C*B*E  = m^4 /A*s^3 = m^4 /C*s^2

So I am looking to see if I can spot a 2 or a 10 factor.

In my TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, 1st year college I write this about the Coulomb Gravity law.

Force of gravity = G*(m_1*m_2)/ distance^2 (Newton's law by 1687)

Force of electrostatics = C(q_1*q_2)/ distance^2 (Coulomb law by 1785)

So let us state the Coulomb-gravity law of Physics. From one of the permutations of V= CBE we have E = (V/(CB)) and when we differentiate that by the calculus we have E' = (V/(CB))'. Now we use the quotient rule of calculus, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/(gh)^2 and as we reduce that we get 3 terms of f'/gh -fg'/g^2h - fh'/gh^2. And using the quotient rule renders (V/(CB))' as that of V'/CB - VC'/C^2B - VB'/CB^2.

E' = (V/(CB))' = V'CB/(CB)^2 - VC'B/(CB)^2 - VCB'/(CB)^2 = V'/CB - VC'/C^2B - VB'/CB^2.

So our Coulomb-gravity law has 3 terms and we can break down each of those 3 terms into statements.

The V'/CB term is the production of a electric field (gravity is a electric field force) as a inverse square law with distance apart of magnetic monopoles, or, with masses of two bodies separated from one another in distance. The 2nd term - VC'/C^2B is a subtraction and is the Coulomb inverse square law with respect to distance. The 3rd term is another subtraction term (- VB'/(CB^2) - is synchronicity of push, pull; the direction of a force of push and pull by the electric field on monopoles or on masses. Synchronicity is best explained in planets such as Jupiter or Saturn and their satellites, as the gravity of the gas giants upon their moons causes the moons period of orbit match the moons period of rotation on axis. As for one monopole attracted to another monopole (remember there is no repel in physics, just a denial of same space occupancy), so the attraction of one monopole to another monopole as Coulomb law will force the spins to match the orbit.

Shame on me, I am supposed to be on vacation until Winter, and here I am deep into pure physics, once again. Such is the life of the King of Science, cannot put it down even if I tried.

So in my 8th edition of Atom Totality I kept tables of data of astronomy. One of those tables was a new Titius-Bode Rule.

MORE DATA TABLE OF SOLAR SYSTEM::

Alright, let me give you a new rule for the distance spacing of planets.
A rule
that follows a Coulomb or gravity force law. Where we consider that
the
Titius Bode Rule above for the inner planets and the satellites of
Jupiter
to be secondary spacings and not primary spacings.

Let me call this new Rule the Plutonium-Titius-Bode Rule:

1 + 2^2 =3D 5
2 + 3^2 =3D 11
3 + 4^2 =3D 19
4 + 5^2 =3D 29

Now here are the actual distance spacings of Jupiter to Neptune

Jupiter =3D 5.2 Au
Saturn =3D 9.5 Au
Uranus =3D 19.1 Au
Neptune =3D 30.0 Au

Now if I carried it out to a fifth planet beyond Jupiter I would have
5 + 6^2 =3D 41
which is not bad for Pluto at actual 39.4 Au.

The bad thing about the Titius Bode Rule is that it was one formula
for two
different planetary groupings. I call them CellWell1 and CellWell2.

So here is the old Titius Bode Rule
(0 + 4)/10 = 0.4 for Mercury (in Au)
(3 + 4)/10 = 0.7 for Venus
(6 + 4)/10 = 1.0 for Earth
..
..
..

Here is the newest AP-Titius-Bode Rule which applies
only to CellWell2 of Jupiter and beyond, whereas the
old Titius Bode Rule really only applied to the inner planets
and the moons of Jupiter.

1 + 2^2 = 5 for Jupiter (in Au)
2 + 3^2 = 11 for Saturn
3 + 4^2 = 19 for Uranus
4 + 5^2 = 29 for Neptune
5 + 6^2 = 41 for Pluto
6 + 7^2 = 55 for Kuiper Belt
7 + 8^2 = 71

Now I looked to see how well matched those numbers are
with actual distances, and they match far better than the
old Titius-Bode Rule.

The King of Science can never put physics down, even if I wanted to. It will come forth out of me until the very minute I die.

So let me review and go back to how planet distances are formed in astronomy. They are formed from Electricity and Magnetism, and their spacings comes from the AP EM Equations, the Coulomb and gravity law. Rate of change of E, electric field, E' = (V/(CB))' Coulomb law & gravity.

And in New Physics we should view the planet spacings as if we are viewing Balmer or Lyman or other Spectral Lines.

The AP-Titius-Bode Rule is a New Physics extension of Spectral lines.

So, where I am looking for a formula to tie together all the planets and Sun rotation spin, I am looking for a similar AP-Titius-Bode Rule, only this time for spin rotation and not the distance from the Sun.

And as you can see, this formula involves squaring, a progressive pattern of squaring.
1 + 2^2 = 5 for Jupiter (in Au)
2 + 3^2 = 11 for Saturn
3 + 4^2 = 19 for Uranus
4 + 5^2 = 29 for Neptune
5 + 6^2 = 41 for Pluto
6 + 7^2 = 55 for Kuiper Belt
7 + 8^2 = 71

There is squaring and inverse squaring in the Coulomb-gravity law of AP Equations.

And the pattern I need to fetch is this pattern.

Rotation period

Sun 27 days
Mercury 58.6 days
Venus -243.0 days
Earth 23 hours 56 minutes
Moon 27.3 days
Mars 24 hours 37 minutes
Jupiter 9 hours 55 minutes
Saturn 10 hours 32 minutes
Uranus -17 hours 14 minutes
Neptune 16 hours 6 minutes
Pluto -6 days 9 hours

Mind you, all of this work started a few days ago after reading about the Sun cycle of 11 years and 22 years from recent science magazines.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics-Chemistry

Now in my Atom Totality series of textbooks I split the Solar System into 2 cells, calling them CellWell1 and CellWell2. Having to do with the idea that the rocky terrestrial planets close to the Sun is a Spectral Line Frequency different from CellWell2 of the gas giants. Thinking the Solar System is more of Spectral Line Physics than anything else.

And so the distance pattern of AP-Titius-Bode Rule also splits the planets into two cells.

So we can expect a Rotation Spin pattern will split the planets into several cells. But here, the cells main distinction are planets without satellites and planets with satellites.

> And the pattern I need to fetch is this pattern.
>
> Rotation period
>

> Sun 27 days

Cell1
> Mercury 58.6 days
> Venus -243.0 days

Cell2
> Earth 23 hours 56 minutes
(Moon 27.3 days)
> Mars 24 hours 37 minutes

Cell3
> Jupiter 9 hours 55 minutes
> Saturn 10 hours 32 minutes
> Uranus -17 hours 14 minutes
> Neptune 16 hours 6 minutes

Cell4
> Pluto -6 days 9 hours
> Mind you, all of this work started a few days ago after reading about the Sun cycle of 11 years and 22 years from recent science magazines.
>

Now I like to jott down a formula before I go to bed, so that I have something to work on in my dreams. I can easily see a pattern for Cell1 as this

Cell1 in days
1 x 5^2 = 25
2 x 10^2 = 200

Cell2 in hours
1x 5^2 = 25

Cell3 in hours
1x 10
2x10

Cell 4 in days

Now I need to review the several Spectral line patterns-- Lyman, Balmer, Paschen.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics-Chemistry

Sun 27 days = 648 hours, mass is 332,950 times Earth
Earth 24 hours
Mars 24 hours, mass is 0.1 of Earth
Jupiter 10 hours, mass is 318 times Earth
Saturn 10.5 hours, mass is 95 times Earth

So I accept the idea that Spin rotation of Sun and planets is due to the electricity and magnetism produced inside every proton of that astro body with muon thrusting in proton torus of 840MeV producing electricity. And that this electricity has a tendency of circulation throughout the astro body causing and creating a Spin Rotation motion in the body. But not only astro bodies, but that this physics causes the spin and rotation of elementary particles of physics.

Picture it as electricity moving to the surface of the particle and its motion opposes other electricity and causes the particle spin.

And I was looking for a special physics constant near to 332,950. Because the rotation of Earth is due to the interplay of Moon 27 days and Earth 1 day equaling the Spin rotation of Sun itself at 27 days.

This marks a Equality of Spin in two different astro body dynamics, the Sun versus Earth-moon. And that is an opportunity to see if there exists a physics constant connecting these two astro systems.

Well, to my surprise there is such a one. It is called the "quantum of circulation" and is of units h/(2m_e) and equal to 3.6*10^-4 m^2*sec^-1

Now if we take the inverse of Quantum of Circulation we end up with 2.7 *10^5. And that is somewhat close but not close enough as 332,950 compared to 270,000.

AP

In my 9th edition of Atom Totality theory book I wrotes this:

10) Coulomb law as not kAA/d^2 but rather as (kAA+jBB)/d^2.

Now where do I get Coulomb law as not kAA/d^2 but rather as (kAA+jBB)/d^2 ? Where do I get that? Well, when you differentiate (f/g)' you get  (f/g)' = (f'g - fg')/g^2. So you get a two term numerator, in fact, even a three term numerator, but I want just two terms to focus upon. So, it appears that Coulomb law is embedded in (6) and is not a fixed static inverse square law but is a variable law ranging in strength from R to 1/R to 1/R^2 (we know that is a logarithmic function). And, the new AP-Maxwell Equations have a EM gravity and have a spin term.

L' = (V/(C*B))'  = (V'*C*B - V*C' B - V*C*B') / (C*B)^2

L' = (C^2B - B^3 - V^2C) / C^2B^2

This is a law that Maxwell had never seen, for it is EM-Gravity law.
It has the form of (kAA + jBB + hCC)/d^2 for an ellipse for planets to orbit the Sun, and it has so much more. And what it does is create a track in astronomy for stars or planets or moons to orbit, and not only tracks, but the planet pushes the moons in their track and the Sun pushes the planets in their tracks, call it an i current type of a push in the track. So gravity is seen not only as a gravitational attraction or pull, but also as a push in a track. So the law creates EM tracks and pushes the mass in the track to orbit. Now that makes a lot of sense, does it not for we can easily picture the Sun as a electric generator pushing monopoles (planets) to flow around in circles as a electric current.

Now, what this new law says is quite astounding for it is the motion law and why gravity is EM and why gravity has a range of motion varying from R to 1/R to 1/R^2, where R is radius.
--- end quoting my 9th edition ---

I do not like formulas of reciprocals as the Balmer Rydberg formula of Old Physics

1/wavelength = R ( 1/m^2 - 1/n^2) where R = 1*10^7 meters^-1 and m,n are positive integers.

No I do not like seeing formulas as reciprocals, ie, divided into 1. For the AP EM equations are not reciprocal formulas.

So I spend some time in converting the language of reciprocals to that of normal language math.

Divide by R on both sides.
Then multiply by wavelength*m^2*n^2 yielding (1/R)m^2n^2 = wavelength*n^2 - wavelength*m^2
Then grouping right-side of equation (1/R)m^2n^2 = wavelength(n^2 - m^2)
Dividing both sides of equation by (n^2-m^2) yields (1/R)m^2n^2 / (n^2 - m^2) = wavelength.

Now, does that look like any of the math in the all possible permutations of the differential equations of Voltage = Coulomb*Magnetic field * Electric Field ? Especially the Coulomb-gravity law of AP-EM equations E' = (V/(CB))'

Strangely enough, if I take the reciprocal of (1/R)m^2n^2 / (n^2 - m^2) = wavelength, where I get the (n^2 - m^2) in the numerator instead of denominator then I do indeed have the AP-EM equation of E' = (V/(CB))'

Now let me plug in some positive integer numbers for the n, m and see where it goes.

1, 2 yields 4/3

2, 3 yields 4*9/5

1,3 yields 9/8

3, 4 yields 9x16/7

So what this research is increasingly leading up to, is the conclusion that stars and planets and satellites in physics are a Spectral Line Phenomenon as to their distances, spin-rotation, revolution orbit, and even their mass and density. When we view the spectral lines from the interior of atoms, is no different than we viewing the Sun, planets, satellites orbiting one another. All come from the same mathematics of AP EM Equations.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics-Chemistry

🦴👤 of Math and 💩👤 of Physics Archimedes "spamtard" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> tarded:

> Todd B Smith on Kibo Parry Moroney by wicked-wikki your free wicked
encyclopedia//
> wiki, wiki Revision history of " James Kibo Parry Moroney"
> James Kibo Parry Moroney - Example Problems from www.exampleproblems
dot com
> James Kibo Parry Moroney (born July 13, 1967) is primarily noted for
his varied
> Kibo Parry Moroney repeatedly claimed to be the greatest living Comic,
.... {a total of 65! attacks on myself!}

StupidPlutonium! Do you realize how much punishment 65 attacks on
myself, spammed multiple times to multiple groups you should deserve?
Fortunately for you, I am not a vengeful person. Since we know you
aren't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed, I shall be gentle, and
invoke a minimal amount of punishment, despite the fact that you deserve
much more.

> In my 9th edition of Atom Totality theory book I wrotes this:
>
> 10) Coulomb law as not kAA/d^2 but rather as (kAA+jBB)/d^2.
>
>
> Now where do I get Coulomb law as not kAA/d^2 but rather as
(kAA+jBB)/d^2 ? Where do I get that?

Good question! Where do you get such garbage when you make stuff up and
pretend that it's true? Could it be:

1) Yet another LSD flashback from AP's misspent youth in the 60's;
2) AP's evil plutonium atom god whispered something devilish in his ear;
3) Magic Mushrooms;
4) Just a bad dream;
5) A 30 year long experiment on how much garbage Usenet sci.* groups can
tolerate before imploding.
>
> AP, Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics-Chemistry
>

On Tuesday, May 31, 2022 at 2:52:40 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> In my 9th edition of Atom Totality theory book I wrote this:
>
> 10) Coulomb law as not kAA/d^2 but rather as (kAA+jBB)/d^2.
>
>
> Now where do I get Coulomb law as not kAA/d^2 but rather as (kAA+jBB)/d^2 ? Where do I get that? Well, when you differentiate (f/g)' you get (f/g)' = (f'g - fg')/g^2. So you get a two term numerator, in fact, even a three term numerator, but I want just two terms to focus upon. So, it appears that Coulomb law is embedded in (6) and is not a fixed static inverse square law but is a variable law ranging in strength from R to 1/R to 1/R^2 (we know that is a logarithmic function). And, the new AP-Maxwell Equations have a EM gravity and have a spin term.
>
>
> L' = (V/(C*B))' = (V'*C*B - V*C' B - V*C*B') / (C*B)^2
>
> L' = (C^2B - B^3 - V^2C) / C^2B^2
>
>
> This is a law that Maxwell had never seen, for it is EM-Gravity law.
> It has the form of (kAA + jBB + hCC)/d^2 for an ellipse for planets to orbit the Sun, and it has so much more. And what it does is create a track in astronomy for stars or planets or moons to orbit, and not only tracks, but the planet pushes the moons in their track and the Sun pushes the planets in their tracks, call it an i current type of a push in the track. So gravity is seen not only as a gravitational attraction or pull, but also as a push in a track. So the law creates EM tracks and pushes the mass in the track to orbit. Now that makes a lot of sense, does it not for we can easily picture the Sun as a electric generator pushing monopoles (planets) to flow around in circles as a electric current.
>
> Now, what this new law says is quite astounding for it is the motion law and why gravity is EM and why gravity has a range of motion varying from R to 1/R to 1/R^2, where R is radius.
> --- end quoting my 9th edition ---
>
> I do not like formulas of reciprocals as the Balmer Rydberg formula of Old Physics
>
> 1/wavelength = R ( 1/m^2 - 1/n^2) where R = 1*10^7 meters^-1 and m,n are positive integers.
>
> No I do not like seeing formulas as reciprocals, ie, divided into 1. For the AP EM equations are not reciprocal formulas.
>
> So I spend some time in converting the language of reciprocals to that of normal language math.
>
> Divide by R on both sides.
> Then multiply by wavelength*m^2*n^2 yielding (1/R)m^2n^2 = wavelength*n^2 - wavelength*m^2
> Then grouping right-side of equation (1/R)m^2n^2 = wavelength(n^2 - m^2)
> Dividing both sides of equation by (n^2-m^2) yields (1/R)m^2n^2 / (n^2 - m^2) = wavelength.
>
> Now, does that look like any of the math in the all possible permutations of the differential equations of Voltage = Coulomb*Magnetic field * Electric Field ? Especially the Coulomb-gravity law of AP-EM equations E' = (V/(CB))'
>
> Strangely enough, if I take the reciprocal of (1/R)m^2n^2 / (n^2 - m^2) = wavelength, where I get the (n^2 - m^2) in the numerator instead of denominator then I do indeed have the AP-EM equation of E' = (V/(CB))'
>
> Now let me plug in some positive integer numbers for the n, m and see where it goes.
>
> 1, 2 yields 4/3
>
> 2, 3 yields 4*9/5
>
> 1,3 yields 9/8
>
> 3, 4 yields 9x16/7
>
> So what this research is increasingly leading up to, is the conclusion that stars and planets and satellites in physics are a Spectral Line Phenomenon as to their distances, spin-rotation, revolution orbit, and even their mass and density. When we view the spectral lines from the interior of atoms, is no different than we viewing the Sun, planets, satellites orbiting one another. All come from the same mathematics of AP EM Equations.

So, let me check this first with the most simple of data, the spacing distance of planets from Sun.

So here is the old Titius Bode Rule
(0 + 4)/10 = 0.4 for Mercury (in Au)
(3 + 4)/10 = 0.7 for Venus
(6 + 4)/10 = 1.0 for Earth
..
..
..

Here is the newest AP-Titius-Bode Rule which applies
only to CellWell2 of Jupiter and beyond, whereas the
old Titius Bode Rule really only applied to the inner planets
and the moons of Jupiter.

1 + 2^2 = 5 for Jupiter (in Au)
2 + 3^2 = 11 for Saturn
3 + 4^2 = 19 for Uranus
4 + 5^2 = 29 for Neptune
5 + 6^2 = 41 for Pluto
6 + 7^2 = 55 for Kuiper Belt
7 + 8^2 = 71

So in the Old Titius Bode Rule, they use a factor of 10. And one has to question where this 10 comes from other than being a number that satisfies the result.
> So here is the old Titius Bode Rule
> (0 + 4)/10 = 0.4 for Mercury (in Au)
> (3 + 4)/10 = 0.7 for Venus
> (6 + 4)/10 = 1.0 for Earth
>

Because in spin rotation, the Sun is 27 days, some say 25 days
Sun 27 days

Cell1
> Mercury 58.6 days
> Venus -243.0 days

And AP could use a factor of 10 for Venus, in that 10 times 25 or 27 days gives me Venus spin rotation.

Titius Bode Rules are distance rules in Spectral Lines of Balmer & Rydberg. Spin Rotation is also in Spectral Lines of Balmer & Rydberg. The only difference is that inside of atoms the particles are stars and planets, and outside the atom, the heavens of stars and planets are another Spectral Lines of electricity and magnetism.

AP

Alright, I am officially on vacation from pure physics and so will stop thinking of this spin rotation and write it up and include in several of my published books. I am too tired of physics. And want to re-capacitor my mind by doing biology.

So back to the issue of evolution of legs. I left off talking about coming in pairs, 4 legs, 6 legs, 8 legs. And that this coming or evolving in pairs must be ingrained in DNA and that is because electricity and magnetism comes in 2. The duality of electricity and magnetism must be the reason that so many physiology structure comes in even numbers. Now it may appear that heart and liver and brain come in the odd number of 1, but if we explore these structures more closely, it is easy to argue that brain, heart, liver are the even number of 2 structures. For the 4 chambers of the heart is argued to be 2 structure and the left side and right side of brain is a even 2 number structure. How about the Liver?

AP

And so, only a hour or two later, having declared again I am on vacation from pure physics, all it takes is a walk and there I am again, doing pure physics. This is the story of my life. Every breathe I take for oxygen, there is some pure physics in that breathe. Even if I try avoiding it, it never ceases to flow.

So as I wrote that planets obey the mathematics of what Spectral Lines in the Balmer Rydberg formula obey. That a glimpse inside the Atom and observing and measuring Spectral Lines is the same as observing and measuring orbits of planets around the Sun and their orbital revolution and their rotation spin, even their masses are governed by Spectral Line mathematics.

So I question the recent physics and astronomy exoplanets. Some reports come in as huge exoplanets many times larger than Jupiter circling their parent star. I question those reports. Because here on Earth using the Newtonian gravity law mathematics of gravity = k*m_1*m_2/ distance^2 could not possible establish correct mass and size and distance of that exoplanet and its parent star. When the true formula and law of gravity and Coulomb comes out of Electric Field differential equation of AP EM equations. That law of AP EM theory involves three terms, where the Newton law of gravity is but one of those three terms and perhaps not even a full term but a partial term of the 3 terms in Electric Field differential equation. E' = (Voltage/(CB))' for as we take the power-rule of that differential equation we end up with 3 terms and Newtonian gravity as just one of those three, perphaps even just a part of one term is all that Newtonian gravity encompasses.

So I doubt the factual data of many of these reported exoplanets. I accede that they exist, but I question the size and distances.

AP

Many months back I remember reading a article in a science magazine summarizing the data on exoplanets. I remember reading how rare it was to find Earth like planets and a alien solar system resembling our Sun. In other words, the summary of exoplanets at that time was our Solar System was rather rare. And yet probably everyone in physics and astronomy expecting our Solar System as commonplace, not rare.

And what kept showing up is huge Jupiter like planets, some 10 times the mass of our Jupiter even a report of a planet 30 times the mass of Jupiter, but then some thinking it was a brown star, but still, so close to its star.

Well, being a person of logical mind, I am going to add a new twist to this story of exoplanets. I concede they exist when announced in discovery. But, what I am going to add to the interpretation, is that although they exist, that Old Physics and Old Astronomy are going by simply the Newtonian law of gravity and its simpleton math. Whereas the true math needed is E' = (Voltage/(CB))' the AP EM law of Coulomb and gravity with it having 3 terms. And where 1 of those 3 terms is Newton gravity, or perhaps a partial term of 1 of the 3. In other words, in the interpretation of newly discovered exoplanets, we have gotten wrong their size, the distance away the star is, the distance from star to exoplanet, their masses are wrong as reported. About the only correct thing in the reports of exoplanets-- is that something exists there, but as for the particulars of that exoplanet, all of those details are silly wrong. This then allows us to eventually see that stars of the size of our Sun are almost all uniformily having 9 planets and those 9 planets comparable in most respects to our own solar system.

I think it utterly ludicrous for physicists and astronomers to think that the Newton gravity law is the only math needed to determine exoplanet structure. And the key clue that such was silly wrong and muddleheaded conclusions is the fact that Sun Solar System seems so rare, when it should be commonplace in planet characteristics.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics-Chemistry

Michael Moroney wrote:

> > Kibo Parry Moroney repeatedly claimed to be the greatest living
> > Comic, ... {a total of 65! attacks on myself!}
>
> StupidPlutonium! Do you realize how much punishment 65 attacks on
> myself, spammed multiple times to multiple groups you should deserve?
> Fortunately for you, I am not a vengeful person. Since we know you

actually not true. The nazi khazar zelenske, and his wife Olena
Zelenskaja, are about to be hunted down by his own nazis of "ukraine", the
nazis feeling betrayed by the gay actor on cocaine (making his face puffin
blow), promising support with food, money, etc, getting nothing in return,
in their nazi stupidity, giving their lives for a pupped gay actor. Just
watch, the nazis will not forget him. Allegedly they already told him
*_"you_are_not_my_president,_you_stupid_gay_actor"_*.