Atomic musings

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light? If you have a personal favorite theory, that is in someway related to the Electric Universe, this is where it can be posted.
balsysr
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:25 am

Atomic musings

Unread post by balsysr » Sun Feb 14, 2021 1:47 am

For most of my life I have been interested in questions like "what's mass" and how does the atomic nucleus work. Now to me mass is just the count of protons, neutrons and electrons in the atoms that make up an object. Quite physical, real and easy to understand. But what is an atom?

In reading from this site I have seen some good work by Miles Mathis, Hotson, and the ideas from the group who have a proton model that has no neutrons, just paired electron/protons. This model leads to a geometry based on the regular platonic solids and can explain most of the periodic table. It’s the latter model I have been basing my musings on.

In life I discovered a new battery material and this led me to crystallography to determine its structure. I got on well with one of the chief scientists at ANSTO in Sydney and we would muse on programs to determine structure (hey, I’m a coder). One idea we started to pursue was to visualise the “spaces” in the crystal, rather than where the ions where. You see it is the size and shape of these voids and their periodicity that determine were other ions can be found/placed. When you have an “unknown” structure clues are important.

Anyway fast forward to today. Thinking about atomic structure I realised that I had been forgetting this idea about “spaces” being important. Now what keeps a nucleus together as like charges repel and all those protons in the nucleus should repel each other and fly apart. Something must act to prevent this, so mainstream science invents a “strong” nuclear force without ever explaining it. Under the model of the nucleus where a proton is actually a proton/electron pair a negative charge in the nucleus allows the possibility of orbits within the nucleus.

Next I consider the insight I have just had. When we talk about electricity we make the same mistake as when we talk about magnetism, they are the same thing and always occur together, its called electro-magnetism for a reason. When Birkland currents form around a moving charge a corresponding magnetic field forms that wraps (forms a circular sheath) around the moving charge. Note the electric field and the magnetic field are separated in space. This is why electrons travelling at the speed of light down the copper to power things bend and follow the wire. Nothing to do with the wire, it’s the magnetic field wrapped around the Cu conductor that steers the electron.

So that’s the thing. Magnetic fields also occur in the nucleus and they will wrap the moving charges. This will contain the charges in a magnetic cage. It’s the magnetic cage that will make it hard for electrons to cross the nuclear surface barrier. Helps explain why the electrons orbiting the nucleus don’t just head for the local protons (with the opposite charge).

To see what I mean start with the simplest atom, Hydrogen. 1 proton and 1 electron. The proton is in the nucleus orbiting in a tight loop (probably trying to follow the electron). As it’s a moving charge a magnetic field in set up and takes the form of a spherical slab around the proton. An electron buzzes around the nucleus with its own magnetic slab. Depending on the polarity of the magnetic fields the electron may well be repulsed by the magnetic field polarity facing it from the nucleus. The magnetic fields are the “spaces” in the nucleus.
We can extend the to work with deuterium, tritium, Lithium and so on up the periodic table.

So, what do you think of my mad idea?

User avatar
JP Michael
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:19 am

Re: Atomic musings

Unread post by JP Michael » Sun Feb 14, 2021 3:48 am

I prefer the Wave Theory of Matter of the likes of Milo Wolff, Yuri Ivanov, Gabriel LaFreniere and Caroline Thompson [PDF]

Simpler, easier and explains more than most atomic theories. LaFreniere has some serious work on detailing wave decoherence 'voids' where electrons and protons like to live, which might help you theorise crystalline structure and why voids occur where they do.

You can find a historical introduction to Wave Theory here, and a summary of theory development here.

crawler
Posts: 823
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 5:33 pm

Re: Atomic musings

Unread post by crawler » Mon Feb 15, 2021 2:16 am

balsysr wrote: Sun Feb 14, 2021 1:47 am For most of my life I have been interested in questions like "what's mass" and how does the atomic nucleus work. Now to me mass is just the count of protons, neutrons and electrons in the atoms that make up an object. Quite physical, real and easy to understand. But what is an atom?
How is mass just the count of protons neutrons & electrons?
How is that real?
How is that easy to understand?

What's mass?
How does mass give inertia?
How does mass give mass?
Is mass a force?
Is mass an illusion?
Is force an illusion?
How can we measure mass? (Answer-- we cant, no-one can)(all we can measure is inertia)(except that as u said we can count protons neutrons & electrons)(i agree that that is the only way)(so u have a head start on everyone else around here).

We know the EU explanation for gravitational force, it is due to charge.
I have provided the aetheric explanations for mass & inertia many times (search reverberation & annihilation).
STR is krapp -- & GTR is mostly krapp.
The present Einsteinian Dark Age of science will soon end – for the times they are a-changin'.
The aether will return – it never left.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests