+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.
In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor law.
A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.
The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.
Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the other
oxygen and hydrogen".AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.
In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.
Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
proportionality constant Z can be used:You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.
The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.
Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
12:24 AM (13 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
--- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)
m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.
This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.
m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.
--- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???
AP
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.
Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
x/v atoms are discharged.
So the mass m discharged is
m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
where
N_A is the Avogadro constant;
Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
F is the Faraday constant.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.
So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.
So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:14 AM (12 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.
But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.
Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:48 AM (11 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Cosmic Rays from Sun
90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.
When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.
I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.
Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?
Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?
So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.
How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
3:11 AM (10 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)
I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.
But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.
So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.
There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.
But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.
So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.
I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.
Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?
So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.
If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.
AP
to
So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.
In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".
For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that
realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygenThe world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.
AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C, to
electrolysis of water.When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)
to
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
10:01 AM (5 hours ago)
to
So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.
To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.
The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".
No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.
I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of
properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.
AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
12:38 PM (4 hours ago)
to
So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.
Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some other
AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.
Chemistry Europe--
"The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...
P Vermeeren, 2023
"The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
"The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."
AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?
AP
My 250th published book.
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely a
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
Preface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistrytextbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possible
Cover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Watermolecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons are
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801 Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801 Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.
In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor law.
A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.
The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.
Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the other
oxygen and hydrogen".AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.
In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.
Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
proportionality constant Z can be used:You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.
The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.
Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
12:24 AM (13 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
--- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)
m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.
This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.
m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.
--- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???
AP
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.
Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
x/v atoms are discharged.
So the mass m discharged is
m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
where
N_A is the Avogadro constant;
Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
F is the Faraday constant.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.
So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.
So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:14 AM (12 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.
But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.
Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:48 AM (11 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Cosmic Rays from Sun
90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.
When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.
I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.
Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?
Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?
So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.
How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
3:11 AM (10 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)
I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.
But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.
So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.
There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.
But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.
So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.
I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.
Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?
So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.
If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.
AP
to
So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.
In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".
For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that
realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygenThe world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.
AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C, to
electrolysis of water.When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)
to
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
10:01 AM (5 hours ago)
to
So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.
To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.
The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".
No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.
I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of
properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.
AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
12:38 PM (4 hours ago)
to
So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.
Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some other
AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.
Chemistry Europe--
"The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...
P Vermeeren, 2023
"The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
"The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."
AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?
AP
My 250th published book.
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely a
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
Preface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistrytextbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possible
Cover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Watermolecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons are
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801 Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
The general idea (cube lines) seems correct. However, the details probably require refinement.
Probably the nucleons do not connect at "points", but the connections are much deeper...
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.
In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor law.
A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.
The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.
Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the other
oxygen and hydrogen".AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.
In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.
Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
proportionality constant Z can be used:You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.
The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.
Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
12:24 AM (13 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
--- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)
m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.
This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.
m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.
--- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???
AP
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.
Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
x/v atoms are discharged.
So the mass m discharged is
m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
where
N_A is the Avogadro constant;
Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
F is the Faraday constant.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.
So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.
So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:14 AM (12 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.
But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.
Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:48 AM (11 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Cosmic Rays from Sun
90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.
When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.
I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.
Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?
Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?
So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.
How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
3:11 AM (10 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)
I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.
But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.
So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.
There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.
But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.
So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.
I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.
Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?
So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.
If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.
AP
to
So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.
In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".
For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that
realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygenThe world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.
AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C, to
electrolysis of water.When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)
to
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
10:01 AM (5 hours ago)
to
So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.
To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.
The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".
No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.
I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of
properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.
AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
12:38 PM (4 hours ago)
to
So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.
Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some other
AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.
Chemistry Europe--
"The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...
P Vermeeren, 2023
"The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
"The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."
AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?
AP
My 250th published book.
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely a
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
Preface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistrytextbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possible
Cover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Watermolecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons are
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
Can_Dr.Nora Berrah,Dr.Thomas Blum,Dr.Alexander Balatsky,Alan Folmsbee - -PLEASE--step into Univ Connecticut physics or chemistry lab and weigh the mass of Electrolysis Water, proving Water is H4O not H2O. AP's homegrown lab cannot do the fine tuningexperiment of weighing a test tube of electrolyzed hydrogen and oxygen from water. If AP is correct Water is really H4O, not H2O. My weighing scale is puny and insufficient for the job at hand, 0.00001 gram or less of hydrogen and oxygen test tubes. If
Folmsbee comedy waste of time in sci.physics. Is the Univ Connecticut deliberately and viciously trying to pollute sci.physics with garbage waste. Does the campus have no garbage cans in hopes of saving money. And asking all students to put garbage intheir side pockets and throw it away once they get home or in the city garbage cans but not on campus??
Spamming jackarse Folmsbee, the oaf needs his own corner in sci.physics, too feeble in mind to go to a appropriate Talk newsgroup but wants to pollute sci.physics.
Alan Folmsbee profile photo
Alan Folmsbee
,...
11:16AM, 5Sep2023
Here is my face's photograph...
Univ Connecticut physics: Dr.Alexander Balatsky, Dr.Nora Berrah,Dr.Thomas Blum, Dr.Vernon Cormier, Dr.Elena Dormidontova,Dr.Moshe Gai, Dr.George Gibsonphysics. I am sure that Alan cannot understand any of this. In several of Alan's past posts he said his engineering degree was UCONN, unless I am mistaken? And we need to keep physics or chemistry going on in sci.physics.
Chemistry: Dr.Douglas Adamson, Dr.Alexander Aksenov,Dr.William Bailey, Dr.Ashis Basu, Dr.Robert Birge,Dr.Robert Bohn, Dr.Christian Bruckner
For a while there, Alan had some geometry of Atoms to share with us, only problem was, none of it was any good,- and all incorrect. And now Alan spams his political opinions. If we had more like Alan Folmsbee, in short time there be no physics in sci.
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
law.Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.
In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor
proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.
The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.
Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the other
oxygen and hydrogen".AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.
In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.
Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
proportionality constant Z can be used:You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.
The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.
Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
12:24 AM (13 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
--- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)
m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.
This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.
m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.
--- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???
AP
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.
Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
x/v atoms are discharged.
So the mass m discharged is
m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
where
N_A is the Avogadro constant;
Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
F is the Faraday constant.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.
So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.
So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:14 AM (12 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.
But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.
Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:48 AM (11 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Cosmic Rays from Sun
90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.
When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.
I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.
Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?
Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?
So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.
How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
3:11 AM (10 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)
I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.
But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.
So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.
There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.
But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.
So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.
I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.
Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?
So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.
If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.
AP
to
So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.
In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".
For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that
to realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygenThe world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.
AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C,
electrolysis of water.When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)
to
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
10:01 AM (5 hours ago)
to
So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.
To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.
The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".
No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.
I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of
properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.
AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
12:38 PM (4 hours ago)
to
So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.
Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some other
AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.
Chemistry Europe--
"The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...
P Vermeeren, 2023
"The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
"The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."
AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?
AP
with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely aMy 250th published book.
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
textbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possiblePreface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistry
molecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons areCover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Water
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
I am amazed that someone who claims to be so smart that he can rewrite the hard physical evidence of chemistry is incapable of figuring out how much a test tube of gas should weigh. At standard temperature and pressure, a mole of any gas occupies about25 liters. Test tubes come in all sizes, but for the sake of argument, assume a size of 25 cc's. That isn't huge, but neither is it small. It can hold about 1/1000 mole of molecules. I don't believe the crap about H4O, but the molecule of hydrogen is H2.
In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon. Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.
Physics minnow
WARNING TO ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTS:
Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
On Sunday, June 8, 1997 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
ControversyInternet access on "an experimental basis."
Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Dr. Panchanathan , present day
NSF Dr. Panchanathan, F. Fleming Crim, Dorothy E Aronson, Brian Stone, James S Ulvestad (math), Rebecca Lynn Keiser, Vernon D. Ross, Lloyd Whitman, John J. Veysey (physics), Scott Stanley
France Anne Cordova
Subra Suresh (bioengineer)
Arden Lee Bement Jr. (nuclear engineering)
Rita R. Colwell (microbiology)
Neal Francis Lane
John Howard Gibbons 1993
Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua
Canada-- NSERC , Alejandro Adem (math) , Navdeep Bains, Francois-Philippe Champagne
Aug 30, 2023, 10:19:20 PM
to Plutonium Atom Universe
News starting to come in that AP's Water Electrolysis Experiment proves the true formula of Water is H4O, not H2O is starting to come in.
I received a letter today
Tom calls Caltech, Dr.Goodstein,Dr.Thorne whiners instead of rolling up their sleeves and actually weighing the mass of hydrogen and oxygen in Water Electrolysis.about 25 liters. Test tubes come in all sizes, but for the sake of argument, assume a size of 25 cc's. That isn't huge, but neither is it small. It can hold about 1/1000 mole of molecules. I don't believe the crap about H4O, but the molecule of hydrogen
On Wednesday, November 15, 2023 at 10:32:47 PM UTC-6, Tom Capizzi wrote:
I am amazed that someone who claims to be so smart that he can rewrite the hard physical evidence of chemistry is incapable of figuring out how much a test tube of gas should weigh. At standard temperature and pressure, a mole of any gas occupies
Volney, who can weigh
David Goodstein, Thomas Phillips,
John Schwarz, Barry Simon, Kip Thorne, Petr Vogel,
Rochus Vogt, Ward Whaling, Michael E. Brown, Felix Boehm, Steven Frautschi, Murray Gell-Mann
Konstantin Batygin, Dr.Frances Arnold (chem), Dr.Barry Barish, Dr.Rudolph Marcus (chem), Dr.Hugh Politzer
the hydrogen and oxygen in Water Electrolysis, for it is unusual that Caltech physics is so shoddy in logical thought as to think of stopping Water Electrolysis by observation of Volume and not weighing the masses.
Volney (CIA) selling CalTech because they cannot do Water Electrolysis properly-- forgetting to actually weigh the mass of hydrogen compared to oxygen, and stop at observing volume. Caltech science is so shoddy of logical reasoning.
Volney Physics failures..CalTech_Dr.David Goodstein,Dr.Frances Arnold (chem), Dr.Barry Barish, Dr.Rudolph Marcus (chem), Dr.Hugh Politzer NSF Dr.Panchanathan,Alejandro Adem, Purdue Univ_France Cordova,and mass are the same. For AP needs to prove decisively, if Water is really H4O or H2O. And of course, this experiment would destroy the Standard Model-- that post-diction theory of physics that never gave a single prediction in all of its tenure.
Physics failures..Rensselaer,Dr.Esther A. Wertz,Dr.Heidi Jo Newberg,Dr.Glenn Ciolek,Dr.Charles Martin,Dr.Joseph Darryl Michael,NSF Dr.Panchanathan,Alejandro Adem,Purdue Univ_France Cordova,..
Why Volney?? Because they are so sloppy and slipshod in Physics experiment of Water Electrolysis, stopping and ceasing the experiment before weighing the mass of the hydrogen compared to mass of oxygen. Is it that they are stupid silly thinking volume
And they even know that a weighing balance of Quartz Crystal MicroBalance has been around since the 1960s, what are they waiting for???
Or is it because they cannot admit the truth of math geometry that slant cut of cone is oval, not ellipse for you need the symmetry of slant cut of cylinder to yield a ellipse.
Re: 2-Looking for a concordance of Dr. Richard Feynmann talking about AP-- on suffering of fools
by Volney 3:57 PM, 17Oct2023
This is Volney-Kibo Parry Moroney spam (CIA connected drag net spam b.s.), and no matter how much you report it to Google Abuse-- they cannot kick the miscreant out-- I suggest reporting this spam to your Congress-person. Not only do they stalk you for30 years but destroy the newsgroup they pollute. Just look at sci.chem which is a destroyed newsgroup. The Google Abuse report only hides the miscreant, but the next day-- new fresh b.s.spam is there.
Kibo Parry Moron-Volney blowing his cover with the CIA in 1997
Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
On Sunday, June 8, 1997 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
Re: Dan is the Kibo Parry Moroney Volney CIA equivalent for Canada-- using Usenet but destroying newsgroups of science in the process
Volney
3
Dan Christensen using TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS at Univ Western Ontario instead of the fake Old Math calculus with its thousands of rules and memorization of trig functions. New Math has 1 rule-- Power Rule
9:03 PM
,
Volney
3
WM using AP's TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS to teach 13-14 year olds CALCULUS, those heading for Gottingen & Uni Berlin for AP reduced Calculus to its most simple form-- add or subtract 1 from exponent.
9:01 PM
182b-Volney uses TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS to teach 13-14 year olds CALCULUS, those heading for Berkeley,Caltech, Stanford, for AP reduced Calculus to its most simple form-- add or subtract 1 from exponent.
8:52 PM
,
Volney
2
Volney uses TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS to teach 13-14 year olds CALCULUS, those heading for Berkeley,Caltech, Stanford, for AP reduced Calculus to its most simple form-- add or subtract 1 from exponent.
8:45 PM
Dan Christensen's profile photo
Dan Christensen
, …
Volney
14
unread,
Re: Dr.Terence Tao along with Dr. Gene D.Block fired from UCLA for teaching propaganda -- truth is slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse, yet UCLA continues their propaganda of ellipse as slant cut.
8:43 PM
Caltech Physics Deptcertainly would not hire a engineer who cannot even do proper percentage.
Felix Boehm, Steven Frautschi
Murray Gell-Mann, David Goodstein, Thomas Phillips,
John Schwarz, Barry Simon, Kip Thorne, Petr Vogel,
Rochus Vogt, Ward Whaling, Michael E. Brown,
Konstantin Batygin, Dr.Frances Arnold (chem), Dr.Barry Barish, Dr.Rudolph Marcus (chem), Dr.Hugh Politzer
Apparently Kibo realized he was a science failure when he could not even do a proper percentage. But then one has to wonder how much he paid to bribe Rensselaer to graduate from the school in engineering unable to do a percentage properly???? For I
On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon. Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote: Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.
Why Volney?? Because they stop short of completing the Water Electrolysis Experiment by only looking at volume, when they are meant to weigh the mass of hydrogen versus oxygen?? Such shoddy minds in experimental physics and chemistry.Humberto Terrones, Gwo Ching Wang, Morris A Washington, Esther A. Wertz, Christian M. Wetzel, Ingrid Wilke, Shengbai Zhang
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Physics dept Dr.Martin Schmidt (ee), Dr.Ivar Giaever
Vincent Meunier, Ethan Brown, Glenn Ciolek, Julian S. Georg, Joel T. Giedt, Yong Sung Kim, Gyorgy Korniss, Toh-Ming Lu, Charles Martin, Joseph Darryl Michael, Heidi Jo Newberg, Moussa N'Gom, Peter Persans, John Schroeder, Michael Shur, Shawn-Yu Lin,
Rensselaer math departmentFengyan Li, Chjan Lim, Yuri V Lvov, Harry McLaughlin, John E. Mitchell, Bruce Piper, David A Schmidt, Daniel Stevenson, Yangyang Xu, Bulent Yener, Donald Drew, William Siegmann
Donald Schwendeman, Jeffrey Banks, Kristin Bennett, Mohamed Boudjelkha, Joseph Ecker, William Henshaw, Isom Herron, Mark H Holmes, David Isaacson, Elizabeth Kam, Ashwani Kapila, Maya Kiehl, Gregor Kovacic, Peter Kramer, Gina Kucinski, Rongjie Lai,
On Friday, June 7, 2019 at 12:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
Physics minnow
WARNING TO ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTS:
What warning is that Kibo Parry failure of science-- warning that insane persons like Kibo Parry Moroney Volney spends their entire life in a hate-mill, never doing anything in science itself. And paid to stalk hate spew
Kibo Parry Moroney-Volney blowing his cover with the CIA in 1997
Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
On Sunday, June 8, 1997 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
---quoting Wikipedia ---Internet access on "an experimental basis."
Controversy
Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public
--- end quote ---
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Dr. Panchanathan , present day
NSF Dr. Panchanathan, F. Fleming Crim, Dorothy E Aronson, Brian Stone, James S Ulvestad (math), Rebecca Lynn Keiser, Vernon D. Ross, Lloyd Whitman, John J. Veysey (physics), Scott Stanley
France Anne Cordova
Subra Suresh (bioengineer)
Arden Lee Bement Jr. (nuclear engineering)
Rita R. Colwell (microbiology)
Neal Francis Lane
John Howard Gibbons 1993
Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua
Canada-- NSERC , Alejandro Adem (math) , Navdeep Bains, Francois-Philippe Champagne
News starting to come in that AP's Water Electrolysis Experiment proves the true formula of Water is H4O, not H2O is starting to come in.of Physics, for it is such an insane theory that it cannot get passed the idea of its subatomic particles as stick and ball, with no job, no function, no task. The Standard Model of Physics, is crazy insane physics for it is all postdiction, never
Aug 30, 2023, 10:19:20 PM
to Plutonium Atom Universe
News starting to come in that AP's Water Electrolysis Experiment proves the true formula of Water is H4O, not H2O is starting to come in.
I received a letter today of Experiment results on Water Electrolysis of weighing the hydrogen test tube versus oxygen test tube and the result is 1/4 atomic mass units of Hydrogen compared to Oxygen.
The researcher weighing 1600 micrograms of hydrogen, using a Eisco-Brownlee-Water-Electrolysis Apparatus.
Using sulfuric acid as electrolyte on ultra pure water. Using low voltage DC of 1.5 volts, 1 amp.
I am not surprised that news of the true formula of Water is H4O comes so quickly. For not much in science is more important than knowing the truth of Water. And this means the start of the complete downfall and throwing out the sick Standard Model
real scientist is not that shoddy and slipshod ignorant, the real scientist then proceeds with -- let us weigh the hydrogen test tube mass versus the oxygen test tube mass.The true Hydrogen Atom is H2 for all atoms need at least one capacitor, and one of the protons in H2 serves as a neutron.
Sad that chemistry and physics throughout the 20th century were too stupid to actually weigh the mass of hydrogen and oxygen in electrolysis, no, the ignorant fools stopped at looking when they saw the volume of hydrogen was twice that of oxygen. A
when you have Hydrogen without a neutron, there is no way to collect the electricity produced by the Faraday law. Think of it as a automobile engine, you cannot have a engine if there is no crank shaft to collect the energy from the thrusting pistonThanks for the news!!!!!
AP
News starting to come in that AP's Water Electrolysis Experiment proves the true formula of Water is H4O, not H2O is starting to come in.
There is another experiment that achieves the same result that Water is truly H4O and not H2O, but I suspect this second method is hugely fraught with difficulty.
The prediction of H4O comes from the Physics idea that a Atom is composed, all atoms mind you, is composed of a proton torus with muon/s inside going round and round thrusting through the torus in the Faraday law and producing electricity. So that
we realize we have a huge number of water molecules in the two identical containers.Same thing with an Atom, it needs 3 parts-- muon as bar magnet, proton as torus of coils, and a capacitor to storage the produced electricity. If one of those parts is missing, the entity is a Subatomic particle and not a atom.
So, when we have Hydrogen as a proton with muon inside, it is not a Atom, until it has a neutron, or, has another proton of hydrogen H2, then it is a Atom.
So that H2 is not a molecule but a Atom. H alone is a subatomic particle.
SECOND EXPERIMENT:
Much harder than Water Electrolysis.
We need to get two identical containers.
We need to be able to make pure heavy-water with deuterium. Deuterium is proton + neutron as hydrogen. Proton + proton is H2 as hydrogen.
So we have two identical containers and we fill one with pure heavy water, deuterium water.
We have the second container and we fill it with pure (light) water.
We now weigh both of them.
If AP is correct, that water is really H4O and not H2O, then both containers should weigh almost the same. Only a tiny fraction difference because the neutron is known to be 940MeV versus proton in Old Physics as 938MeV a tiny difference of 2MeV, but
If water is truly H4O, the weights should be almost the same. If water is H2O, then there is a **large difference** in weights.
But the Water Electrolysis experiment is much easier to conduct and get results.
vitamins.And, there is the biological processes that apparently cannot distinguish between heavy water and that of regular normal water.
Deuterium Water is the same in biology as is normal regular water. This means that water must be H4O, due to biology as proof.
Deuterium Water in atomic mass units is 16 for the oxygen and 4 for the deuterium.
Regular normal Water in atomic mass units is 16 for the oxygen and 4 for the 4 protons in H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry had regular water as H2O in atomic mass units of 16 oxygen and 2 hydrogen for 2 protons.
If biology functions whether heavy water or normal water all the same, then water itself must be H4O.
Now, there maybe some animal or plant that can separate out heavy water from H4O water???
Searching the literature today for where biology needs as essential deuterium water. And not too surprised that it is a essential requirement in metabolism. In fact one web site listed the need for deuterium more than the need of many minerals and
can distinguish D2O from H4O (thought of as H2O. We obtain pure D2O and pure H4O each filling 1/2 of the container. We stir and mix them. And then we observe with the EM beam for separation. If the light water is truly H4O, it takes a long time for theNow tonight I came up with two new exciting experiments to verify that Water is truly H4O and not H2O.
H4O is 4 protons with muons inside the 840MeV proton toruses.
Deuterium water is DOD. And the difference between D2O and H4O is merely the difference of 4MeV for as last reported, neutron = 940MeV and proton (with muon inside) is 938MeV, a difference of 2MeV but for water is 2+2 = 4MeV.
So these two new experiments take advantage of the fact that what we think is normal regular water is actually very close to heavy water of D2O, with only a 4MeV difference.
EXPERIMENT #3 Water layers in still pond of D2O mixed with H4O (what we thought was H2O.
So in this experiment we get a clear glass container and mix H4O with D2O. If Old Physics is correct, the heavy water should sink rapidly in the container while the light water floats to the top rapidly. And we have some sort of beam of photons that
forcing the water a certain distance.EXPERIMENT #4 also plays on this minor difference of 4MeV. We devise a sort of squirt gun for D2O and a identical squirt gun for H4O (what we call H2O). We put pure D2O in one squirt gun and the H40 or light water in the other squirt gun. Both guns
vitamins.If AP is correct that light water is really H4O and not H2O as we squirt both guns, where the water lands should be almost the same distance considering H4O is only 4MeV apart from D2O.
If Old Physics and Old Chemistry is correct, then D2O water is 940 + 940 = 1880MeV apart from light water of H2O, and H4O is only 4MeV apart.
So where the squirt gun lands the D2O is a very much shorter distance than a H2O land, but a H4 land distance is nearly the same as the D2O land.
These two experiments are very exciting and would be a very nice confirming evidence to Water Electrolysis actual weighing the mass in atomic mass units.
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 5:07:13 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Searching the literature today for where biology needs as essential deuterium water. And not too surprised that it is a essential requirement in metabolism. In fact one web site listed the need for deuterium more than the need of many minerals and
that can distinguish D2O from H4O (thought of as H2O. We obtain pure D2O and pure H4O each filling 1/2 of the container. We stir and mix them. And then we observe with the EM beam for separation. If the light water is truly H4O, it takes a long time forNow tonight I came up with two new exciting experiments to verify that Water is truly H4O and not H2O.
H4O is 4 protons with muons inside the 840MeV proton toruses.
Deuterium water is DOD. And the difference between D2O and H4O is merely the difference of 4MeV for as last reported, neutron = 940MeV and proton (with muon inside) is 938MeV, a difference of 2MeV but for water is 2+2 = 4MeV.
So these two new experiments take advantage of the fact that what we think is normal regular water is actually very close to heavy water of D2O, with only a 4MeV difference.
EXPERIMENT #3 Water layers in still pond of D2O mixed with H4O (what we thought was H2O.
So in this experiment we get a clear glass container and mix H4O with D2O. If Old Physics is correct, the heavy water should sink rapidly in the container while the light water floats to the top rapidly. And we have some sort of beam of photons
Uniformity means that the difference between D2O and H4O is so slight of a difference (only 4MeV, compared to 1880MeV for H2O, that Brownian motion keeps the D2O and H4O in a Uniform Distribution in all bodies of water. I was going through the researchApparently this Experiment is already done and called for-- There is Uniform Distribution of heavy water Deuterium Water in the Oceans, Lakes, Ponds, Streams and Rivers. Heavy Water is not layered in the oceans or lakes or ponds or streams or rivers.
My 250th published book.with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely a
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
textbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possiblePreface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistry
molecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons areCover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Water
Product detailsCaltech & Rensselaer Polytech do only slipshod physics-chemistry experiments of Water Electrolysis, too dumb to weigh the hydrogen & oxygen to see if H4O or H2O
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
Tom calls Caltech, Dr.Goodstein,Dr.Thorne whiners instead of rolling up their sleeves "
On Thursday, November 16, 2023 at 1:32:28 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:about 25 liters. Test tubes come in all sizes, but for the sake of argument, assume a size of 25 cc's. That isn't huge, but neither is it small. It can hold about 1/1000 mole of molecules. I don't believe the crap about H4O, but the molecule of hydrogen
Tom calls Caltech, Dr.Goodstein,Dr.Thorne whiners instead of rolling up their sleeves and actually weighing the mass of hydrogen and oxygen in Water Electrolysis.
On Wednesday, November 15, 2023 at 10:32:47 PM UTC-6, Tom Capizzi wrote: >>> I am amazed that someone who claims to be so smart that he can rewrite the hard physical evidence of chemistry is incapable of figuring out how much a test tube of gas should weigh. At standard temperature and pressure, a mole of any gas occupies
What you are seeing is psychological projection, where someone withCaltech & Rensselaer Polytech do only slipshod physics-chemistry experiments of Water Electrolysis, too dumb to weigh the hydrogen & oxygen to see if H4O or H2O
Aside from being an unbelievable moron, AP's reading comprehension skills are not too sharp either.
"Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Tom calls Caltech, Dr.Goodstein,Dr.Thorne whiners instead of rolling up their sleeves "
No, you idiot, (and that is being charitable, assuming you didn't do it on purpose just to discredit my comment). I was referring to you as the whiner.
On Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 7:31:55 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:interpretation cannot by stomached as we require the perfect mimicry of the said tasks reaching far beyond a mere twenty years of programming. And then to top it all off, if you fail to mimic the mimics than you will not be received by the journals.
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.) A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
The general idea (cube lines) seems correct. However, the details probably require refinement.I am in favor of taking the atomic model as open. There are far too many 'why?' questions that go upon empirical answers which is to say "That's just the way it is, sonny.", or, to put it another way: "Shut up and compute."
Probably the nucleons do not connect at "points", but the connections are much deeper...
Now, to back off of my own criticism here, we would have to confess that this predicament does in fact expose the state of humanity as regards physics, and confesses that we are at the beginning of physics; rather than nearing the end. That this lively
Alan has been at this for as long as I have been on usenet as I recall. That is some compulsion; no: it is far beyond a compulsive act which he is on here.while I want to take the atom as open for theoretical work, it feels beyond me.
I have failed to follow it closely, but in my brief recent readings clearly his position has developed, and honestly the task at hand feels so begrudgingly difficult both in terms of theory and in terms of empirical verification, that I confess that
Of course my own insistence on this foreign nature is not at all helpful. How many of us carry this boundary of reception? How many of us have been tuned for a boundary that cannot possibly reinterpret Alan enough to engage in a conversation here? Isuffer the same on my polysign numbers. They are bleeding over into physics, and it is my hope that spacetime will embody electromagnetism in an informational melange which places spacetime as a structural feature whose informational complexity can
T = 0statement of balance, and while the ordinary real valued equation simply brings something over to the other side like:
and be done with the whole thing. Stranger still, this equation exposes a factoid via a simple choice or propostion let's say to the reader to adopt this concept of "equals zero" as if it is integral to every mathematical expression. This is a
V - IR,pun is true what is one to do with these higher types which posess the lower typology of spacetime? Did I see a five by six in your writing, sir?
this Tee equals zero thing at the moment is simply reading:
T.
That is sort of scary in that it then places all of the complexity into the spacetime basis. At least in this moment of my analytical thought this could be the case.
Stranger still, for within the spacetime interpretation of polysign we stop at three or four:
P1 P2 P3 | P4
due to this breakpoint, thus engaging arithmetic support for spacetime including unidirectional time as P1 which are the one-signed numbers, but this progression could carry on, and while the intrigue of P6 is rather more than that of P5, and while the
On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 12:42:56 PM UTC-8, Alan Folmsbee wrote:The evidence comes from the past observations.
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
ExperimentHow do you have evidence for something unobservable?
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):The neutrons in isotopes seem to interlock with each other like gears that make a stable isotope or an unstable isotope. With the database of xyz coordinates of all neutrons,
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
The general idea (cube lines) seems correct. However, the details probably require refinement.
Probably the nucleons do not connect at "points", but the connections are much deeper...
On Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 7:31:55 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:interpretation cannot by stomached as we require the perfect mimicry of the said tasks reaching far beyond a mere twenty years of programming. And then to top it all off, if you fail to mimic the mimics than you will not be received by the journals.
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.) A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
The general idea (cube lines) seems correct. However, the details probably require refinement.I am in favor of taking the atomic model as open. There are far too many 'why?' questions that go upon empirical answers which is to say "That's just the way it is, sonny.", or, to put it another way: "Shut up and compute."
Probably the nucleons do not connect at "points", but the connections are much deeper...
Now, to back off of my own criticism here, we would have to confess that this predicament does in fact expose the state of humanity as regards physics, and confesses that we are at the beginning of physics; rather than nearing the end. That this lively
Alan has been at this for as long as I have been on usenet as I recall. That is some compulsion; no: it is far beyond a compulsive act which he is on here.while I want to take the atom as open for theoretical work, it feels beyond me.
I have failed to follow it closely, but in my brief recent readings clearly his position has developed, and honestly the task at hand feels so begrudgingly difficult both in terms of theory and in terms of empirical verification, that I confess that
Of course my own insistence on this foreign nature is not at all helpful. How many of us carry this boundary of reception? How many of us have been tuned for a boundary that cannot possibly reinterpret Alan enough to engage in a conversation here? Isuffer the same on my polysign numbers. They are bleeding over into physics, and it is my hope that spacetime will embody electromagnetism in an informational melange which places spacetime as a structural feature whose informational complexity can
T = 0statement of balance, and while the ordinary real valued equation simply brings something over to the other side like:
and be done with the whole thing. Stranger still, this equation exposes a factoid via a simple choice or propostion let's say to the reader to adopt this concept of "equals zero" as if it is integral to every mathematical expression. This is a
V - IR,pun is true what is one to do with these higher types which posess the lower typology of spacetime? Did I see a five by six in your writing, sir?
this Tee equals zero thing at the moment is simply reading:
T.
That is sort of scary in that it then places all of the complexity into the spacetime basis. At least in this moment of my analytical thought this could be the case.
Stranger still, for within the spacetime interpretation of polysign we stop at three or four:
P1 P2 P3 | P4
due to this breakpoint, thus engaging arithmetic support for spacetime including unidirectional time as P1 which are the one-signed numbers, but this progression could carry on, and while the intrigue of P6 is rather more than that of P5, and while the
On Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 7:31:55 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.) A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
The general idea (cube lines) seems correct. However, the details probably require refinement.The neutrons in isotopes seem to interlock with each other like gears that make a stable isotope or an unstable isotope. With the database of xyz coordinates of all neutrons,
Probably the nucleons do not connect at "points", but the connections are much deeper...
that gear phenomenon can be simulated to predict stability.
Folmsbee comedy waste of time in sci.physics. Is the Univ Connecticut deliberately and viciously trying to pollute sci.physics with garbage waste. Does the campus have no garbage cans in hopes of saving money. And asking all students to put garbage intheir side pockets and throw it away once they get home or in the city garbage cans but not on campus??
Spamming jackarse Folmsbee, the oaf needs his own corner in sci.physics, too feeble in mind to go to a appropriate Talk newsgroup but wants to pollute sci.physics.
Alan Folmsbee profile photo
Alan Folmsbee
,...
11:16AM, 5Sep2023
Here is my face's photograph...
Univ Connecticut physics: Dr.Alexander Balatsky, Dr.Nora Berrah,Dr.Thomas Blum, Dr.Vernon Cormier, Dr.Elena Dormidontova,Dr.Moshe Gai, Dr.George Gibsonphysics. I am sure that Alan cannot understand any of this. In several of Alan's past posts he said his engineering degree was UCONN, unless I am mistaken? And we need to keep physics or chemistry going on in sci.physics.
Chemistry: Dr.Douglas Adamson, Dr.Alexander Aksenov,Dr.William Bailey, Dr.Ashis Basu, Dr.Robert Birge,Dr.Robert Bohn, Dr.Christian Bruckner
For a while there, Alan had some geometry of Atoms to share with us, only problem was, none of it was any good,- and all incorrect. And now Alan spams his political opinions. If we had more like Alan Folmsbee, in short time there be no physics in sci.
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
law.Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.
In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor
proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.
The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.
Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the other
oxygen and hydrogen".AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.
In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.
Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
proportionality constant Z can be used:You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.
The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.
Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
12:24 AM (13 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
--- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)
m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.
This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.
m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.
--- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???
AP
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.
Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
x/v atoms are discharged.
So the mass m discharged is
m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
where
N_A is the Avogadro constant;
Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
F is the Faraday constant.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.
So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.
So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:14 AM (12 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.
But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.
Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:48 AM (11 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Cosmic Rays from Sun
90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.
When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.
I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.
Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?
Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?
So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.
How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
3:11 AM (10 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)
I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.
But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.
So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.
There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.
But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.
So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.
I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.
Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?
So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.
If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.
AP
to
So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.
In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".
For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that
to realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygenThe world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.
AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C,
electrolysis of water.When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)
to
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
10:01 AM (5 hours ago)
to
So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.
To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.
The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".
No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.
I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of
properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.
AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
12:38 PM (4 hours ago)
to
So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.
Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some other
AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.
Chemistry Europe--
"The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...
P Vermeeren, 2023
"The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
"The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."
AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?
AP
with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely aMy 250th published book.
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
textbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possiblePreface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistry
molecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons areCover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Water
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801 Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
On Tuesday, 14 November 2023 at 07:42:56 UTC+11, Alan Folmsbee wrote:
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
ExperimentOne neutron is one proton+one electron.
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
Only protons, electrons and aether in our infinite universe - and naturally, eternal., with trillion-year cycles of birth, death and rebirth of stars.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):Yes: short answer and longer...
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
ExperimentDoes your model allow you to indicate the reason for the occurrence
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
of electrons in specific groups: 8, 18... in atoms?
Spamming jackarse Folmsbee, the oaf needs his own corner in sci.physics, too feeble in mind to go to a appropriate Talk newsgroup but wants to pollute sci.physics.
Alan Folmsbee profile photo
Alan Folmsbee
,...
11:16AM, 5Sep2023
Here is my face's photograph...
physics. I am sure that Alan cannot understand any of this. In several of Alan's past posts he said his engineering degree was UCONN, unless I am mistaken? And we need to keep physics or chemistry going on in sci.physics.Univ Connecticut physics: Dr.Alexander Balatsky, Dr.Nora Berrah,Dr.Thomas Blum, Dr.Vernon Cormier, Dr.Elena Dormidontova,Dr.Moshe Gai, Dr.George Gibson
Chemistry: Dr.Douglas Adamson, Dr.Alexander Aksenov,Dr.William Bailey, Dr.Ashis Basu, Dr.Robert Birge,Dr.Robert Bohn, Dr.Christian Bruckner
For a while there, Alan had some geometry of Atoms to share with us, only problem was, none of it was any good,- and all incorrect. And now Alan spams his political opinions. If we had more like Alan Folmsbee, in short time there be no physics in sci.
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
law.Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.
In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor
other proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.
The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.
Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the
oxygen and hydrogen".AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.
In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.
Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
proportionality constant Z can be used:You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.
The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.
Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
12:24 AM (13 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
--- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)
m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.
This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.
m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.
--- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???
AP
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.
Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
x/v atoms are discharged.
So the mass m discharged is
m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
where
N_A is the Avogadro constant;
Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
F is the Faraday constant.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.
So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.
So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:14 AM (12 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.
But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.
Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:48 AM (11 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Cosmic Rays from Sun
90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.
When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.
I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.
Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?
Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?
So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.
How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
3:11 AM (10 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)
I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.
But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.
So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.
There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.
But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.
So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.
I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.
Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?
So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.
If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.
AP
to
So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.
In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".
For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that
to realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygenThe world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.
AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C,
electrolysis of water.When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)
to
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
10:01 AM (5 hours ago)
to
So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.
To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.
The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".
No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.
I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of
other properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.
AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
12:38 PM (4 hours ago)
to
So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.
Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some
AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.
Chemistry Europe--
"The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...
P Vermeeren, 2023
"The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
"The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."
AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?
AP
research with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry isMy 250th published book.
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history
textbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possiblePreface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistry
Water molecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muonsCover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
On Tuesday, November 21, 2023 at 8:13:19 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.) A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Yes: short answer and longer...ExperimentDoes your model allow you to indicate the reason for the occurrence
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
of electrons in specific groups: 8, 18... in atoms?
The octet rules of 8, 18 and 32 are explained by the cube with 6 faces.
A stack of protons and neutrons makes a cube, for iron 3x3x3, carbon 2x2x2 . This ensures survival of isotope candidates due to hexagonal outer surfaces. Heavy candidate isotopes without a cube are destroyed. No witnesses.
"Octet rule of 8" is from 6 faces plus 2 core protons in carbon through manganese. 6+2=8
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors the face. 6*3=18
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has an
axis protons. 32 = 6*5 + 2
=================================================
Longer answer
The octet rule is about two or more atoms making a compound with
8 charges counted by people.
"Octet rule of 8"
The cube 2x2x2 in the cores of chemical elements after boron,
have 2 protons and 6 neutrons. That follows ordinary symmetry ideas and proton repulsion expectations. See the carbon images on pyramidalcube.blogspot.com .
The light elements like C and O have 2 s electrons and 2 core protons.
The remaining protons in light elements are in lines touching the core protons.
All of the protons are prominent, compared to the case for heavy elements. Elements like Ge have many protons that are less prominent than any of carbon's protons. The point is that 2 core protons are prominent-enough to add up to 8 for the octet rule. 8 = 6 + 2
The 2 core protons in the cube-2 module are the driving partners
that make the 2 s electrons occur in places that are centrally positioned in light
elements. All chemical elements from
Z=6 to Z=25 have 2 core electrons. A transition then happens for Fe at Z=26. Irons has a 3x3x3 cubic lattice of 8 protons and 19 neutrons. There is no 2 protons
at the cores of elements Fe through germanium. The core has 8 protons after the
transition elements began. Chemists should consider that no 2s electrons are expected for Fe, according to this theory. (Transition away from 2s to 8core).
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors
the face. 6*3=18
Lithium is rare but iron is abundant. Li-7 has 3 protons. When iron is created,
3 protons go on the tips of 6 pyramids that armore 6 faces of a cube 3x3x3. Those 18 protons are prominently positioned on the outermost regions of a nucleus.
The Octet rule 18 is justified by counting the most salient positive charges.
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has
an axis proton. 32 = 6*5 + 2
Lutetium is an example chemical element that has an octet-32 style.
see images of many nuclei, in theory https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/113E-bKKGBYfxiNiNDVDKTpaaPCRyWDBs/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=102023371043899938599&rtpof=true&sd=true
The Octet-32 example of Lu has 2 rings of protons and inside each ring is a line of
axial protons. The 6 faces of lutetium are covered with a pyramid with 4 or 3 layers.
One can see that 5 protons can be chosen as "prominent on the tip of each of 6 pyramids.
32 = 6faces*5protons + 2 axial protons
The 20 Rules of Nuclear Structure feature the cube at the core and the lines of protons.
"The Static Nucleus Theory of the Face-Armored Cubic Lattice" ISBN 9798363495403
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
Rule 1: There is a simple cubic lattice of protons and neutrons at the core of each element that
has a Z atomic number that is greater than five.
Rule 2: Protons in the cube are far from each other as if electrostatic repulsion is in effect.
Rule 3: The six faces of the cube are armored by pyramids of protons and neutrons.
Rule 4: Protons outside of the cube tend to form lines of protons as if electrostatic repulsion is
not true in all three dimensions.
Rule 5: There are 19 foundation elements upon which the 90 incremental elements are built. The
19 foundation elements are:
carbon, oxygen, neon, phosphorus, argon, iron,
germanium, krypton, zirconium, cadmium, xenon, cerium, hafnium,
tungsten, polonium, radon, uranium, mendelevium, and nihonium.
Rule 6: The shapes of foundation elements do not depend on protons being different from
neutrons. Both are treated equally, as baryons, to define the silhouettes and 3D shapes of each
element.
Rule 7: Four sides of the cube have pyramids of the same shape (axial symmetry), for foundation
elements. The top and bottom pyramids can have different sizes. All of the side pyramids are equal
in size and shape. Rotations of pyramids do not need to be identical when positioned on the four
side faces of a cube.
Rule 8: Pyramids should be rotated to avoid creating a three-way intersection of lines of protons.
Some elements cannot avoid that structure, like promethium and nitrogen. Rule 9: Incremental elements have added nucleons on the exteriors of foundation elements to
fill the gaps between pyramids. There are 90 incremental elements based on the foundation
256
elements. Nine elements are not based on a foundation element. They are H, He, Li, Be, B, Tc, Pm,
Pa, and Og.
Rule 10: An incremental element is assembled by first placing the neutrons into the deepest pits
of a foundation element and then adding one proton into the deepest pit where protons tend to
form lines of protons. If a line cannot be formed, the added proton can go anywhere that does not
join 3 protons together in a triangle. If that is not possible, a proton can go anywhere.
Rule 11: Light elements have a sparse allocation of protons near the center and a denser
allocation of protons near the tips of pyramids.
Rule 12: Pyramids can be up to six layers thick.
Rule 13: Contraction of pyramid bases occurs increasingly with heavier elements. A six-layer
pyramid can rest on a five-layer contracted base, which can reside on a four-layer contracted base,
which can reside in a three-layer cube, nestled into a stable arrangement. Rule 14: Sphere stacking for a pyramid does not need to nestle into pits of a cube and the pyramid
can be stacked onto a cube vertically. For example, in oxygen, a two-layer pyramid can be stacked
onto a two-layer cube.
Rule 15: Pyramids can have lines of protons plus additional protons at the corners of pyramids to
achieve the Z atomic number that is known by standard science.
Rule 16: Symmetrical arrangements of protons are preferred over non-symmetrical structures.
The same is true for neutrons. The two-layer pyramid sets the example in iron. The cube-2 and cube-
3 are also symmetrical in their allocations of protons and neutrons.
Rule 17: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. Z is the atomic number.
Rule 18: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. A is equal to the number
of protons plus the number of neutrons. Z is the atomic number. Z is equal to the number of protons
in an element.
Rule 19: Each proton has one electron paired with it using a line of flux. This drives multiple
protons into a single line of protons that touch each other.
Rule 20: The longest distance from each neutron to a proton is one diameter of a neutron.
środa, 22 listopada 2023 o 15:59:19 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
On Tuesday, November 21, 2023 at 8:13:19 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Yes: short answer and longer...ExperimentDoes your model allow you to indicate the reason for the occurrence
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
of electrons in specific groups: 8, 18... in atoms?
The octet rules of 8, 18 and 32 are explained by the cube with 6 faces.
A stack of protons and neutrons makes a cube, for iron 3x3x3, carbon 2x2x2 .
This ensures survival of isotope candidates due to hexagonal outer surfaces.
Heavy candidate isotopes without a cube are destroyed. No witnesses.
"Octet rule of 8" is from 6 faces plus 2 core protons in carbon through manganese. 6+2=8
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors the face. 6*3=18
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has an
axis protons. 32 = 6*5 + 2 =================================================
Longer answer
The octet rule is about two or more atoms making a compound with
8 charges counted by people.
"Octet rule of 8"
The cube 2x2x2 in the cores of chemical elements after boron,
have 2 protons and 6 neutrons. That follows ordinary symmetry ideas and proton repulsion expectations. See the carbon images on pyramidalcube.blogspot.com .
The light elements like C and O have 2 s electrons and 2 core protons.
The remaining protons in light elements are in lines touching the core protons.
All of the protons are prominent, compared to the case for heavy elements. Elements like Ge have many protons that are less prominent than any of carbon's protons. The point is that 2 core protons are prominent-enough to add up to 8 for the octet rule. 8 = 6 + 2
The 2 core protons in the cube-2 module are the driving partners
that make the 2 s electrons occur in places that are centrally positioned in light
elements. All chemical elements from
Z=6 to Z=25 have 2 core electrons. A transition then happens for Fe at Z=26.
Irons has a 3x3x3 cubic lattice of 8 protons and 19 neutrons. There is no 2 protons
at the cores of elements Fe through germanium. The core has 8 protons after the
transition elements began. Chemists should consider that no 2s electrons are
expected for Fe, according to this theory. (Transition away from 2s to 8core).
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors
the face. 6*3=18
Lithium is rare but iron is abundant. Li-7 has 3 protons. When iron is created,
3 protons go on the tips of 6 pyramids that armore 6 faces of a cube 3x3x3.
Those 18 protons are prominently positioned on the outermost regions of a nucleus.
The Octet rule 18 is justified by counting the most salient positive charges.
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has
an axis proton. 32 = 6*5 + 2
Lutetium is an example chemical element that has an octet-32 style.
see images of many nuclei, in theory https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/113E-bKKGBYfxiNiNDVDKTpaaPCRyWDBs/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=102023371043899938599&rtpof=true&sd=true
The Octet-32 example of Lu has 2 rings of protons and inside each ring is a line of
axial protons. The 6 faces of lutetium are covered with a pyramid with 4 or 3 layers.
One can see that 5 protons can be chosen as "prominent on the tip of each of 6 pyramids.
32 = 6faces*5protons + 2 axial protons
Hello Enes Richard,The 20 Rules of Nuclear Structure feature the cube at the core and the lines of protons.
"The Static Nucleus Theory of the Face-Armored Cubic Lattice" ISBN 9798363495403
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
Rule 1: There is a simple cubic lattice of protons and neutrons at the core of each element thatThe number of "protons" in the nucleus determines the number of electrons in the atom.
has a Z atomic number that is greater than five.
Rule 2: Protons in the cube are far from each other as if electrostatic repulsion is in effect.
Rule 3: The six faces of the cube are armored by pyramids of protons and neutrons.
Rule 4: Protons outside of the cube tend to form lines of protons as if electrostatic repulsion is
not true in all three dimensions.
Rule 5: There are 19 foundation elements upon which the 90 incremental elements are built. The
19 foundation elements are:
carbon, oxygen, neon, phosphorus, argon, iron,
germanium, krypton, zirconium, cadmium, xenon, cerium, hafnium,
tungsten, polonium, radon, uranium, mendelevium, and nihonium.
Rule 6: The shapes of foundation elements do not depend on protons being different from
neutrons. Both are treated equally, as baryons, to define the silhouettes and 3D shapes of each
element.
Rule 7: Four sides of the cube have pyramids of the same shape (axial symmetry), for foundation
elements. The top and bottom pyramids can have different sizes. All of the side pyramids are equal
in size and shape. Rotations of pyramids do not need to be identical when positioned on the four
side faces of a cube.
Rule 8: Pyramids should be rotated to avoid creating a three-way intersection of lines of protons.
Some elements cannot avoid that structure, like promethium and nitrogen. Rule 9: Incremental elements have added nucleons on the exteriors of foundation elements to
fill the gaps between pyramids. There are 90 incremental elements based on the foundation
256
elements. Nine elements are not based on a foundation element. They are H, He, Li, Be, B, Tc, Pm,
Pa, and Og.
Rule 10: An incremental element is assembled by first placing the neutrons into the deepest pits
of a foundation element and then adding one proton into the deepest pit where protons tend to
form lines of protons. If a line cannot be formed, the added proton can go anywhere that does not
join 3 protons together in a triangle. If that is not possible, a proton can go anywhere.
Rule 11: Light elements have a sparse allocation of protons near the center and a denser
allocation of protons near the tips of pyramids.
Rule 12: Pyramids can be up to six layers thick.
Rule 13: Contraction of pyramid bases occurs increasingly with heavier elements. A six-layer
pyramid can rest on a five-layer contracted base, which can reside on a four-layer contracted base,
which can reside in a three-layer cube, nestled into a stable arrangement. Rule 14: Sphere stacking for a pyramid does not need to nestle into pits of a cube and the pyramid
can be stacked onto a cube vertically. For example, in oxygen, a two-layer pyramid can be stacked
onto a two-layer cube.
Rule 15: Pyramids can have lines of protons plus additional protons at the corners of pyramids to
achieve the Z atomic number that is known by standard science.
Rule 16: Symmetrical arrangements of protons are preferred over non-symmetrical structures.
The same is true for neutrons. The two-layer pyramid sets the example in iron. The cube-2 and cube-
3 are also symmetrical in their allocations of protons and neutrons.
Rule 17: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. Z is the atomic number.
Rule 18: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. A is equal to the number
of protons plus the number of neutrons. Z is the atomic number. Z is equal to the number of protons
in an element.
Rule 19: Each proton has one electron paired with it using a line of flux. This drives multiple
protons into a single line of protons that touch each other.
Rule 20: The longest distance from each neutron to a proton is one diameter of a neutron.
Probably the position/place of "protons" in the structure of the nucleus determines
the movement of electrons in the atom.
How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?
Ps.
we must remember that electrons must have the ability to produce not only radiation characteristic
of a given atom. They must also be able to absorb thermal radiation from the environment
and return it back in appropriate non-linear ranges.
On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 8:29:18 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
środa, 22 listopada 2023 o 15:59:19 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
On Tuesday, November 21, 2023 at 8:13:19 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus. The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Yes: short answer and longer...ExperimentDoes your model allow you to indicate the reason for the occurrence
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
of electrons in specific groups: 8, 18... in atoms?
The octet rules of 8, 18 and 32 are explained by the cube with 6 faces. A stack of protons and neutrons makes a cube, for iron 3x3x3, carbon 2x2x2 .
This ensures survival of isotope candidates due to hexagonal outer surfaces.
Heavy candidate isotopes without a cube are destroyed. No witnesses.
"Octet rule of 8" is from 6 faces plus 2 core protons in carbon through manganese. 6+2=8
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors the face. 6*3=18
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has an
axis protons. 32 = 6*5 + 2 =================================================
Longer answer
The octet rule is about two or more atoms making a compound with
8 charges counted by people.
"Octet rule of 8"
The cube 2x2x2 in the cores of chemical elements after boron,
have 2 protons and 6 neutrons. That follows ordinary symmetry ideas and proton repulsion expectations. See the carbon images on pyramidalcube.blogspot.com .
The light elements like C and O have 2 s electrons and 2 core protons. The remaining protons in light elements are in lines touching the core protons.
All of the protons are prominent, compared to the case for heavy elements.
Elements like Ge have many protons that are less prominent than any of carbon's protons. The point is that 2 core protons are prominent-enough to
add up to 8 for the octet rule. 8 = 6 + 2
The 2 core protons in the cube-2 module are the driving partners
that make the 2 s electrons occur in places that are centrally positioned in light
elements. All chemical elements from
Z=6 to Z=25 have 2 core electrons. A transition then happens for Fe at Z=26.
Irons has a 3x3x3 cubic lattice of 8 protons and 19 neutrons. There is no 2 protons
at the cores of elements Fe through germanium. The core has 8 protons after the
transition elements began. Chemists should consider that no 2s electrons are
expected for Fe, according to this theory. (Transition away from 2s to 8core).
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors
the face. 6*3=18
Lithium is rare but iron is abundant. Li-7 has 3 protons. When iron is created,
3 protons go on the tips of 6 pyramids that armore 6 faces of a cube 3x3x3.
Those 18 protons are prominently positioned on the outermost regions of a nucleus.
The Octet rule 18 is justified by counting the most salient positive charges.
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has
an axis proton. 32 = 6*5 + 2
Lutetium is an example chemical element that has an octet-32 style.
see images of many nuclei, in theory https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/113E-bKKGBYfxiNiNDVDKTpaaPCRyWDBs/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=102023371043899938599&rtpof=true&sd=true
The Octet-32 example of Lu has 2 rings of protons and inside each ring is a line of
axial protons. The 6 faces of lutetium are covered with a pyramid with 4 or 3 layers.
One can see that 5 protons can be chosen as "prominent on the tip of each of 6 pyramids.
32 = 6faces*5protons + 2 axial protons
The 20 Rules of Nuclear Structure feature the cube at the core and the lines of protons.
"The Static Nucleus Theory of the Face-Armored Cubic Lattice" ISBN 9798363495403
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
Rule 1: There is a simple cubic lattice of protons and neutrons at the core of each element thatThe number of "protons" in the nucleus determines the number of electrons in the atom.
has a Z atomic number that is greater than five.
Rule 2: Protons in the cube are far from each other as if electrostatic repulsion is in effect.
Rule 3: The six faces of the cube are armored by pyramids of protons and neutrons.
Rule 4: Protons outside of the cube tend to form lines of protons as if electrostatic repulsion is
not true in all three dimensions.
Rule 5: There are 19 foundation elements upon which the 90 incremental elements are built. The
19 foundation elements are:
carbon, oxygen, neon, phosphorus, argon, iron,
germanium, krypton, zirconium, cadmium, xenon, cerium, hafnium, tungsten, polonium, radon, uranium, mendelevium, and nihonium.
Rule 6: The shapes of foundation elements do not depend on protons being different from
neutrons. Both are treated equally, as baryons, to define the silhouettes and 3D shapes of each
element.
Rule 7: Four sides of the cube have pyramids of the same shape (axial symmetry), for foundation
elements. The top and bottom pyramids can have different sizes. All of the side pyramids are equal
in size and shape. Rotations of pyramids do not need to be identical when positioned on the four
side faces of a cube.
Rule 8: Pyramids should be rotated to avoid creating a three-way intersection of lines of protons.
Some elements cannot avoid that structure, like promethium and nitrogen. Rule 9: Incremental elements have added nucleons on the exteriors of foundation elements to
fill the gaps between pyramids. There are 90 incremental elements based on the foundation
256
elements. Nine elements are not based on a foundation element. They are H, He, Li, Be, B, Tc, Pm,
Pa, and Og.
Rule 10: An incremental element is assembled by first placing the neutrons into the deepest pits
of a foundation element and then adding one proton into the deepest pit where protons tend to
form lines of protons. If a line cannot be formed, the added proton can go anywhere that does not
join 3 protons together in a triangle. If that is not possible, a proton can go anywhere.
Rule 11: Light elements have a sparse allocation of protons near the center and a denser
allocation of protons near the tips of pyramids.
Rule 12: Pyramids can be up to six layers thick.
Rule 13: Contraction of pyramid bases occurs increasingly with heavier elements. A six-layer
pyramid can rest on a five-layer contracted base, which can reside on a four-layer contracted base,
which can reside in a three-layer cube, nestled into a stable arrangement.
Rule 14: Sphere stacking for a pyramid does not need to nestle into pits of a cube and the pyramid
can be stacked onto a cube vertically. For example, in oxygen, a two-layer pyramid can be stacked
onto a two-layer cube.
Rule 15: Pyramids can have lines of protons plus additional protons at the corners of pyramids to
achieve the Z atomic number that is known by standard science.
Rule 16: Symmetrical arrangements of protons are preferred over non-symmetrical structures.
The same is true for neutrons. The two-layer pyramid sets the example in iron. The cube-2 and cube-
3 are also symmetrical in their allocations of protons and neutrons. Rule 17: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. Z is the atomic number.
Rule 18: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. A is equal to the number
of protons plus the number of neutrons. Z is the atomic number. Z is equal to the number of protons
in an element.
Rule 19: Each proton has one electron paired with it using a line of flux. This drives multiple
protons into a single line of protons that touch each other.
Rule 20: The longest distance from each neutron to a proton is one diameter of a neutron.
Probably the position/place of "protons" in the structure of the nucleus determines
the movement of electrons in the atom.
How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?
Ps.Hello Enes Richard,
we must remember that electrons must have the ability to produce not only radiation characteristic
of a given atom. They must also be able to absorb thermal radiation from the environment
and return it back in appropriate non-linear ranges.
You asked, "How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?"
People first look at bonding electrons to discuss the octet rule.
Please equally consider non-bonding electrons to help drive
the octet rule. All electrons in a compound, that has elements from C to Mn, are located relative to a cubic lattice of protons and neutrons in the core.
The bonding electrons are excluded from where non-bonding electrons are busy.
The combined population of bonding and non-bonding orbitals has a cubic lattice
super-imposed on it. That means 8 corners and 6 faces in a cube.
The non-bonding electrons and orbitals can expand out to the 8 points on a cube.
The bonding electrons are influenced by that, so 8 electrons are counted near
the nuclei. Bonding electrons are between the nuclei and non-bonding are pushed away towards the perimeter of the molecule. That perimeter has 8 corners
because of the hidden cube in the nucleus. That over-all tendency influences the
bonds to be in 8 mirrored locations, away from the 8 points of a cube of non-
bonding electron orbitals.
Conclusion
No matter how complicated the nuclear proton allocation is, the hidden cube has influence to make 6 charge prominences where 1*6 or 3*6 or 5*6 protons will
be considered by chemists to be bonding. The non-bonding orbitals enforce the cubic structure on the
bonding elecrons. This does not address some possible light molecules without a cube, like Li2Be4H14, where Z<6 for lowest Atomic Numbers.
Do those molecules need an octet rule?
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.
In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor law.
A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.
The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.
Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the other
oxygen and hydrogen".AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.
In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.
Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
proportionality constant Z can be used:You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.
The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.
Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
12:24 AM (13 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
--- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)
m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.
This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.
m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.
--- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???
AP
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.
Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
x/v atoms are discharged.
So the mass m discharged is
m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
where
N_A is the Avogadro constant;
Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
F is the Faraday constant.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.
So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.
So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:14 AM (12 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.
But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.
Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:48 AM (11 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Cosmic Rays from Sun
90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.
When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.
I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.
Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?
Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?
So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.
How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
3:11 AM (10 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)
I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.
But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.
So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.
There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.
But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.
So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.
I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.
Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?
So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.
If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.
AP
to
So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.
In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".
For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that
realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygenThe world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.
AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C, to
electrolysis of water.When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)
to
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
10:01 AM (5 hours ago)
to
So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.
To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.
The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".
No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.
I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of
properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.
AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
12:38 PM (4 hours ago)
to
So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.
Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some other
AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.
Chemistry Europe--
"The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...
P Vermeeren, 2023
"The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
"The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."
AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?
AP
My 250th published book.
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely a
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
Preface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistrytextbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possible
Cover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Watermolecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons are
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
piątek, 24 listopada 2023 o 21:33:10 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 8:29:18 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
środa, 22 listopada 2023 o 15:59:19 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
On Tuesday, November 21, 2023 at 8:13:19 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus. The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and 3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Yes: short answer and longer...ExperimentDoes your model allow you to indicate the reason for the occurrence of electrons in specific groups: 8, 18... in atoms?
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
The octet rules of 8, 18 and 32 are explained by the cube with 6 faces.
A stack of protons and neutrons makes a cube, for iron 3x3x3, carbon 2x2x2 .
This ensures survival of isotope candidates due to hexagonal outer surfaces.
Heavy candidate isotopes without a cube are destroyed. No witnesses.
"Octet rule of 8" is from 6 faces plus 2 core protons in carbon through manganese. 6+2=8
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors the face. 6*3=18
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has an
axis protons. 32 = 6*5 + 2 =================================================
Longer answer
The octet rule is about two or more atoms making a compound with
8 charges counted by people.
"Octet rule of 8"
The cube 2x2x2 in the cores of chemical elements after boron,
have 2 protons and 6 neutrons. That follows ordinary symmetry ideas and
proton repulsion expectations. See the carbon images on pyramidalcube.blogspot.com .
The light elements like C and O have 2 s electrons and 2 core protons. The remaining protons in light elements are in lines touching the core protons.
All of the protons are prominent, compared to the case for heavy elements.
Elements like Ge have many protons that are less prominent than any of carbon's protons. The point is that 2 core protons are prominent-enough to
add up to 8 for the octet rule. 8 = 6 + 2
The 2 core protons in the cube-2 module are the driving partners
that make the 2 s electrons occur in places that are centrally positioned in light
elements. All chemical elements from
Z=6 to Z=25 have 2 core electrons. A transition then happens for Fe at Z=26.
Irons has a 3x3x3 cubic lattice of 8 protons and 19 neutrons. There is no 2 protons
at the cores of elements Fe through germanium. The core has 8 protons after the
transition elements began. Chemists should consider that no 2s electrons are
expected for Fe, according to this theory. (Transition away from 2s to 8core).
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors
the face. 6*3=18
Lithium is rare but iron is abundant. Li-7 has 3 protons. When iron is created,
3 protons go on the tips of 6 pyramids that armore 6 faces of a cube 3x3x3.
Those 18 protons are prominently positioned on the outermost regions of a nucleus.
The Octet rule 18 is justified by counting the most salient positive charges.
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has
an axis proton. 32 = 6*5 + 2
Lutetium is an example chemical element that has an octet-32 style. see images of many nuclei, in theory https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/113E-bKKGBYfxiNiNDVDKTpaaPCRyWDBs/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=102023371043899938599&rtpof=true&sd=true
The Octet-32 example of Lu has 2 rings of protons and inside each ring is a line of
axial protons. The 6 faces of lutetium are covered with a pyramid with 4 or 3 layers.
One can see that 5 protons can be chosen as "prominent on the tip of each of 6 pyramids.
32 = 6faces*5protons + 2 axial protons
Dear Enes Richard,The 20 Rules of Nuclear Structure feature the cube at the core and the lines of protons.
"The Static Nucleus Theory of the Face-Armored Cubic Lattice" ISBN 9798363495403
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
Rule 1: There is a simple cubic lattice of protons and neutrons at the core of each element thatThe number of "protons" in the nucleus determines the number of electrons in the atom.
has a Z atomic number that is greater than five.
Rule 2: Protons in the cube are far from each other as if electrostatic repulsion is in effect.
Rule 3: The six faces of the cube are armored by pyramids of protons and neutrons.
Rule 4: Protons outside of the cube tend to form lines of protons as if electrostatic repulsion is
not true in all three dimensions.
Rule 5: There are 19 foundation elements upon which the 90 incremental elements are built. The
19 foundation elements are:
carbon, oxygen, neon, phosphorus, argon, iron,
germanium, krypton, zirconium, cadmium, xenon, cerium, hafnium, tungsten, polonium, radon, uranium, mendelevium, and nihonium.
Rule 6: The shapes of foundation elements do not depend on protons being different from
neutrons. Both are treated equally, as baryons, to define the silhouettes and 3D shapes of each
element.
Rule 7: Four sides of the cube have pyramids of the same shape (axial symmetry), for foundation
elements. The top and bottom pyramids can have different sizes. All of the side pyramids are equal
in size and shape. Rotations of pyramids do not need to be identical when positioned on the four
side faces of a cube.
Rule 8: Pyramids should be rotated to avoid creating a three-way intersection of lines of protons.
Some elements cannot avoid that structure, like promethium and nitrogen.
Rule 9: Incremental elements have added nucleons on the exteriors of foundation elements to
fill the gaps between pyramids. There are 90 incremental elements based on the foundation
256
elements. Nine elements are not based on a foundation element. They are H, He, Li, Be, B, Tc, Pm,
Pa, and Og.
Rule 10: An incremental element is assembled by first placing the neutrons into the deepest pits
of a foundation element and then adding one proton into the deepest pit where protons tend to
form lines of protons. If a line cannot be formed, the added proton can go anywhere that does not
join 3 protons together in a triangle. If that is not possible, a proton can go anywhere.
Rule 11: Light elements have a sparse allocation of protons near the center and a denser
allocation of protons near the tips of pyramids.
Rule 12: Pyramids can be up to six layers thick.
Rule 13: Contraction of pyramid bases occurs increasingly with heavier elements. A six-layer
pyramid can rest on a five-layer contracted base, which can reside on a four-layer contracted base,
which can reside in a three-layer cube, nestled into a stable arrangement.
Rule 14: Sphere stacking for a pyramid does not need to nestle into pits of a cube and the pyramid
can be stacked onto a cube vertically. For example, in oxygen, a two-layer pyramid can be stacked
onto a two-layer cube.
Rule 15: Pyramids can have lines of protons plus additional protons at the corners of pyramids to
achieve the Z atomic number that is known by standard science.
Rule 16: Symmetrical arrangements of protons are preferred over non-symmetrical structures.
The same is true for neutrons. The two-layer pyramid sets the example in iron. The cube-2 and cube-
3 are also symmetrical in their allocations of protons and neutrons. Rule 17: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. Z is the atomic number.
Rule 18: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. A is equal to the number
of protons plus the number of neutrons. Z is the atomic number. Z is equal to the number of protons
in an element.
Rule 19: Each proton has one electron paired with it using a line of flux. This drives multiple
protons into a single line of protons that touch each other.
Rule 20: The longest distance from each neutron to a proton is one diameter of a neutron.
Probably the position/place of "protons" in the structure of the nucleus determines
the movement of electrons in the atom.
How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?
Ps.Hello Enes Richard,
we must remember that electrons must have the ability to produce not only radiation characteristic
of a given atom. They must also be able to absorb thermal radiation from the environment
and return it back in appropriate non-linear ranges.
You asked, "How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?"
People first look at bonding electrons to discuss the octet rule.
Please equally consider non-bonding electrons to help drive
the octet rule. All electrons in a compound, that has elements from C to Mn,
are located relative to a cubic lattice of protons and neutrons in the core.
The bonding electrons are excluded from where non-bonding electrons are busy.
The combined population of bonding and non-bonding orbitals has a cubic lattice
super-imposed on it. That means 8 corners and 6 faces in a cube.
The non-bonding electrons and orbitals can expand out to the 8 points on a cube.
The bonding electrons are influenced by that, so 8 electrons are counted near
the nuclei. Bonding electrons are between the nuclei and non-bonding are pushed away towards the perimeter of the molecule. That perimeter has 8 corners
because of the hidden cube in the nucleus. That over-all tendency influences the
bonds to be in 8 mirrored locations, away from the 8 points of a cube of non-
bonding electron orbitals.
Conclusion
No matter how complicated the nuclear proton allocation is, the hidden cube
has influence to make 6 charge prominences where 1*6 or 3*6 or 5*6 protons will
be considered by chemists to be bonding. The non-bonding orbitals enforce the cubic structure on the
bonding elecrons. This does not address some possible light molecules without a cube, like Li2Be4H14, where Z<6 for lowest Atomic Numbers.
Do those molecules need an octet rule?
"How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?"
We still don't have an answer to this question.
How do these electrons move, in relation to your models of atomic nuclei?
Do they orbit in any orbits around the nucleus?
Or are they moving in some cloud of probability?
Is there any other move? What?
How do they absorb and produce electromagnetic radiation?
On Saturday, November 25, 2023 at 2:35:22 PM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
piątek, 24 listopada 2023 o 21:33:10 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 8:29:18 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
środa, 22 listopada 2023 o 15:59:19 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
On Tuesday, November 21, 2023 at 8:13:19 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Yes: short answer and longer...ExperimentDoes your model allow you to indicate the reason for the occurrence
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
of electrons in specific groups: 8, 18... in atoms?
The octet rules of 8, 18 and 32 are explained by the cube with 6 faces.
A stack of protons and neutrons makes a cube, for iron 3x3x3, carbon 2x2x2 .
This ensures survival of isotope candidates due to hexagonal outer surfaces.
Heavy candidate isotopes without a cube are destroyed. No witnesses.
"Octet rule of 8" is from 6 faces plus 2 core protons in carbon through manganese. 6+2=8
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors the face. 6*3=18
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has an
axis protons. 32 = 6*5 + 2 =================================================
Longer answer
The octet rule is about two or more atoms making a compound with
8 charges counted by people.
"Octet rule of 8"
The cube 2x2x2 in the cores of chemical elements after boron,
have 2 protons and 6 neutrons. That follows ordinary symmetry ideas and
proton repulsion expectations. See the carbon images on pyramidalcube.blogspot.com .
The light elements like C and O have 2 s electrons and 2 core protons.
The remaining protons in light elements are in lines touching the core protons.
All of the protons are prominent, compared to the case for heavy elements.
Elements like Ge have many protons that are less prominent than any of
carbon's protons. The point is that 2 core protons are prominent-enough to
add up to 8 for the octet rule. 8 = 6 + 2
The 2 core protons in the cube-2 module are the driving partners that make the 2 s electrons occur in places that are centrally positioned in light
elements. All chemical elements from
Z=6 to Z=25 have 2 core electrons. A transition then happens for Fe at Z=26.
Irons has a 3x3x3 cubic lattice of 8 protons and 19 neutrons. There is no 2 protons
at the cores of elements Fe through germanium. The core has 8 protons after the
transition elements began. Chemists should consider that no 2s electrons are
expected for Fe, according to this theory. (Transition away from 2s to 8core).
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors
the face. 6*3=18
Lithium is rare but iron is abundant. Li-7 has 3 protons. When iron is created,
3 protons go on the tips of 6 pyramids that armore 6 faces of a cube 3x3x3.
Those 18 protons are prominently positioned on the outermost regions of a nucleus.
The Octet rule 18 is justified by counting the most salient positive charges.
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has
an axis proton. 32 = 6*5 + 2
Lutetium is an example chemical element that has an octet-32 style. see images of many nuclei, in theory https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/113E-bKKGBYfxiNiNDVDKTpaaPCRyWDBs/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=102023371043899938599&rtpof=true&sd=true
The Octet-32 example of Lu has 2 rings of protons and inside each ring is a line of
axial protons. The 6 faces of lutetium are covered with a pyramid with 4 or 3 layers.
One can see that 5 protons can be chosen as "prominent on the tip of each of 6 pyramids.
32 = 6faces*5protons + 2 axial protons
The 20 Rules of Nuclear Structure feature the cube at the core and the lines of protons.
"The Static Nucleus Theory of the Face-Armored Cubic Lattice" ISBN 9798363495403
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
Rule 1: There is a simple cubic lattice of protons and neutrons at the core of each element thatThe number of "protons" in the nucleus determines the number of electrons in the atom.
has a Z atomic number that is greater than five.
Rule 2: Protons in the cube are far from each other as if electrostatic repulsion is in effect.
Rule 3: The six faces of the cube are armored by pyramids of protons and neutrons.
Rule 4: Protons outside of the cube tend to form lines of protons as if electrostatic repulsion is
not true in all three dimensions.
Rule 5: There are 19 foundation elements upon which the 90 incremental elements are built. The
19 foundation elements are:
carbon, oxygen, neon, phosphorus, argon, iron,
germanium, krypton, zirconium, cadmium, xenon, cerium, hafnium, tungsten, polonium, radon, uranium, mendelevium, and nihonium.
Rule 6: The shapes of foundation elements do not depend on protons being different from
neutrons. Both are treated equally, as baryons, to define the silhouettes and 3D shapes of each
element.
Rule 7: Four sides of the cube have pyramids of the same shape (axial symmetry), for foundation
elements. The top and bottom pyramids can have different sizes. All of the side pyramids are equal
in size and shape. Rotations of pyramids do not need to be identical when positioned on the four
side faces of a cube.
Rule 8: Pyramids should be rotated to avoid creating a three-way intersection of lines of protons.
Some elements cannot avoid that structure, like promethium and nitrogen.
Rule 9: Incremental elements have added nucleons on the exteriors of foundation elements to
fill the gaps between pyramids. There are 90 incremental elements based on the foundation
256
elements. Nine elements are not based on a foundation element. They are H, He, Li, Be, B, Tc, Pm,
Pa, and Og.
Rule 10: An incremental element is assembled by first placing the neutrons into the deepest pits
of a foundation element and then adding one proton into the deepest pit where protons tend to
form lines of protons. If a line cannot be formed, the added proton can go anywhere that does not
join 3 protons together in a triangle. If that is not possible, a proton can go anywhere.
Rule 11: Light elements have a sparse allocation of protons near the center and a denser
allocation of protons near the tips of pyramids.
Rule 12: Pyramids can be up to six layers thick.
Rule 13: Contraction of pyramid bases occurs increasingly with heavier elements. A six-layer
pyramid can rest on a five-layer contracted base, which can reside on a four-layer contracted base,
which can reside in a three-layer cube, nestled into a stable arrangement.
Rule 14: Sphere stacking for a pyramid does not need to nestle into pits of a cube and the pyramid
can be stacked onto a cube vertically. For example, in oxygen, a two-layer pyramid can be stacked
onto a two-layer cube.
Rule 15: Pyramids can have lines of protons plus additional protons at the corners of pyramids to
achieve the Z atomic number that is known by standard science.
Rule 16: Symmetrical arrangements of protons are preferred over non-symmetrical structures.
The same is true for neutrons. The two-layer pyramid sets the example in iron. The cube-2 and cube-
3 are also symmetrical in their allocations of protons and neutrons. Rule 17: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. Z is the atomic number.
Rule 18: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. A is equal to the number
of protons plus the number of neutrons. Z is the atomic number. Z is equal to the number of protons
in an element.
Rule 19: Each proton has one electron paired with it using a line of flux. This drives multiple
protons into a single line of protons that touch each other.
Rule 20: The longest distance from each neutron to a proton is one diameter of a neutron.
Probably the position/place of "protons" in the structure of the nucleus determines
the movement of electrons in the atom.
How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?
Ps.Hello Enes Richard,
we must remember that electrons must have the ability to produce not only radiation characteristic
of a given atom. They must also be able to absorb thermal radiation from the environment
and return it back in appropriate non-linear ranges.
You asked, "How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?"
People first look at bonding electrons to discuss the octet rule.
Please equally consider non-bonding electrons to help drive
the octet rule. All electrons in a compound, that has elements from C to Mn,
are located relative to a cubic lattice of protons and neutrons in the core.
The bonding electrons are excluded from where non-bonding electrons are busy.
The combined population of bonding and non-bonding orbitals has a cubic lattice
super-imposed on it. That means 8 corners and 6 faces in a cube.
The non-bonding electrons and orbitals can expand out to the 8 points on a cube.
The bonding electrons are influenced by that, so 8 electrons are counted near
the nuclei. Bonding electrons are between the nuclei and non-bonding are pushed away towards the perimeter of the molecule. That perimeter has 8 corners
because of the hidden cube in the nucleus. That over-all tendency influences the
bonds to be in 8 mirrored locations, away from the 8 points of a cube of non-
bonding electron orbitals.
Conclusion
No matter how complicated the nuclear proton allocation is, the hidden cube
has influence to make 6 charge prominences where 1*6 or 3*6 or 5*6 protons will
be considered by chemists to be bonding. The non-bonding orbitals enforce
the cubic structure on the
bonding elecrons. This does not address some possible light molecules without a cube, like Li2Be4H14, where Z<6 for lowest Atomic Numbers.
Do those molecules need an octet rule?
"How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?"
We still don't have an answer to this question.
How do these electrons move, in relation to your models of atomic nuclei?
Do they orbit in any orbits around the nucleus?Dear Enes Richard,
Or are they moving in some cloud of probability?
Is there any other move? What?
How do they absorb and produce electromagnetic radiation?
You asked about how electrons move.
Electrons are intimately involved with protons by means of a
wavefunction. This is a flat-shaped conveyor belt with a return
path. An electron-proton pair and its wavefunction are a
sub-universe. It is technically analogous to the universe, but
missing one dimension. The wavefunction is also called
a line of flux (line).
Electrons are using the line of flux to make a bond by
wrapping around another line of flux. Momentum keeps
electrons moving in a local atomic coordinate system. Some authors
call this the "cosmology of the solid state", but liquids and gases
also have the same lines connecting each electron to one proton.
Magnetism uses lines of flux from an electron,
in a primary current loop, to a far away proton in a secondary
current loop. So electrons can be a meter away from the proton
or electrons can be an Angstrom away from a proton in an atom
and both situations have a line of flux connecting them.
Electrons move close to other electrons and a tangling of lines of flux makes one electron orbit another electron line of flux. Unwrapping and wrapping of lines make valence bonds between atoms or
lines wrap to make non-valence non-bonding orbits. They move mechanistically, deterministically and the cloud description is
old-school.
Gravity dimensions: x y z t
Wavefunction dimensions hx hy hz th
hz goes to a neutron from a proton
hx hy and th go between an electron and a proton.
hx and hy grow from the proton and th is drained into the proton.
A mirror is in each proton and electron so the 4 new dimensions
circulate to keep the electron moving, beyond what momentum does.
The line of flux can grow longer or shrink by photon
absorption or emission. The line velocity can get faster or slower
as momentum is distributed to balance the dimensions.
The wavefunction has a typical speed of 8 inches per second
of the conveyor belt (hx hy th).
Photons are emitted from a wavefunction as a
two dimensional loop (hx th). The photon has no energy, it has a velocity-like property v = hx/th
The photon changes the atomic energy because E = velocity X momentum.
When a photon is emitted, the two dimensions get shorter in length, but
the third dimension hy is unchanged. That discrepancy is adjusted when
a proton gives or takes momentum that changes lengths. That is about
energy changes in molecule or ion. The photon travels until it hits a molecule, then it is absorbed to change the local lengths of hx and th.
The hy length is adjusted there and energy is increased.
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.
In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor law.
A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.
The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.
Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the other
oxygen and hydrogen".AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.
In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.
Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
proportionality constant Z can be used:You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.
The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.
Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
12:24 AM (13 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
--- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)
m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.
This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.
m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.
--- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???
AP
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.
Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
x/v atoms are discharged.
So the mass m discharged is
m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
where
N_A is the Avogadro constant;
Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
F is the Faraday constant.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.
So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.
So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:14 AM (12 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.
But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.
Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:48 AM (11 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Cosmic Rays from Sun
90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.
When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.
I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.
Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?
Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?
So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.
How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
3:11 AM (10 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)
I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.
But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.
So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.
There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.
But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.
So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.
I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.
Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?
So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.
If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.
AP
to
So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.
In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".
For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that
realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygenThe world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.
AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C, to
electrolysis of water.When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)
to
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
10:01 AM (5 hours ago)
to
So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.
To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.
The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".
No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.
I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of
properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.
AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
12:38 PM (4 hours ago)
to
So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.
Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some other
AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.
Chemistry Europe--
"The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...
P Vermeeren, 2023
"The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
"The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."
AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?
AP
My 250th published book.
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely a
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
Preface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistrytextbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possible
Cover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Watermolecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons are
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 12:42:56 PM UTC-8, Alan Folmsbee wrote:Hi Mitch R.,
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
ExperimentHow do you have evidence for something unobservable?
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
On Wednesday, November 15, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-5, Timothy Golden wrote:lively interpretation cannot by stomached as we require the perfect mimicry of the said tasks reaching far beyond a mere twenty years of programming. And then to top it all off, if you fail to mimic the mimics than you will not be received by the
On Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 7:31:55 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus.
The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
The general idea (cube lines) seems correct. However, the details probably require refinement.I am in favor of taking the atomic model as open. There are far too many 'why?' questions that go upon empirical answers which is to say "That's just the way it is, sonny.", or, to put it another way: "Shut up and compute."
Probably the nucleons do not connect at "points", but the connections are much deeper...
Now, to back off of my own criticism here, we would have to confess that this predicament does in fact expose the state of humanity as regards physics, and confesses that we are at the beginning of physics; rather than nearing the end. That this
while I want to take the atom as open for theoretical work, it feels beyond me.Alan has been at this for as long as I have been on usenet as I recall. That is some compulsion; no: it is far beyond a compulsive act which he is on here.
I have failed to follow it closely, but in my brief recent readings clearly his position has developed, and honestly the task at hand feels so begrudgingly difficult both in terms of theory and in terms of empirical verification, that I confess that
suffer the same on my polysign numbers. They are bleeding over into physics, and it is my hope that spacetime will embody electromagnetism in an informational melange which places spacetime as a structural feature whose informational complexity canOf course my own insistence on this foreign nature is not at all helpful. How many of us carry this boundary of reception? How many of us have been tuned for a boundary that cannot possibly reinterpret Alan enough to engage in a conversation here? I
statement of balance, and while the ordinary real valued equation simply brings something over to the other side like:T = 0
and be done with the whole thing. Stranger still, this equation exposes a factoid via a simple choice or propostion let's say to the reader to adopt this concept of "equals zero" as if it is integral to every mathematical expression. This is a
the pun is true what is one to do with these higher types which posess the lower typology of spacetime? Did I see a five by six in your writing, sir?V - IR,
this Tee equals zero thing at the moment is simply reading:
T.
That is sort of scary in that it then places all of the complexity into the spacetime basis. At least in this moment of my analytical thought this could be the case.
Stranger still, for within the spacetime interpretation of polysign we stop at three or four:
P1 P2 P3 | P4
due to this breakpoint, thus engaging arithmetic support for spacetime including unidirectional time as P1 which are the one-signed numbers, but this progression could carry on, and while the intrigue of P6 is rather more than that of P5, and while
Hello Timothy,
The verification of my work should be paid with a one-year treasury.
I want to hire a chemist, mechanical engineer, programmer, and
physicist to make more progress with my theory of proton locations
and neutrons locations. Is $10,000 enough for a month of consulting?
piątek, 24 listopada 2023 o 21:33:10 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 8:29:18 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
środa, 22 listopada 2023 o 15:59:19 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
On Tuesday, November 21, 2023 at 8:13:19 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus. The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and 3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Yes: short answer and longer...ExperimentDoes your model allow you to indicate the reason for the occurrence of electrons in specific groups: 8, 18... in atoms?
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
The octet rules of 8, 18 and 32 are explained by the cube with 6 faces.
A stack of protons and neutrons makes a cube, for iron 3x3x3, carbon 2x2x2 .
This ensures survival of isotope candidates due to hexagonal outer surfaces.
Heavy candidate isotopes without a cube are destroyed. No witnesses.
"Octet rule of 8" is from 6 faces plus 2 core protons in carbon through manganese. 6+2=8
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors the face. 6*3=18
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has an
axis protons. 32 = 6*5 + 2 =================================================
Longer answer
The octet rule is about two or more atoms making a compound with
8 charges counted by people.
"Octet rule of 8"
The cube 2x2x2 in the cores of chemical elements after boron,
have 2 protons and 6 neutrons. That follows ordinary symmetry ideas and
proton repulsion expectations. See the carbon images on pyramidalcube.blogspot.com .
The light elements like C and O have 2 s electrons and 2 core protons. The remaining protons in light elements are in lines touching the core protons.
All of the protons are prominent, compared to the case for heavy elements.
Elements like Ge have many protons that are less prominent than any of carbon's protons. The point is that 2 core protons are prominent-enough to
add up to 8 for the octet rule. 8 = 6 + 2
The 2 core protons in the cube-2 module are the driving partners
that make the 2 s electrons occur in places that are centrally positioned in light
elements. All chemical elements from
Z=6 to Z=25 have 2 core electrons. A transition then happens for Fe at Z=26.
Irons has a 3x3x3 cubic lattice of 8 protons and 19 neutrons. There is no 2 protons
at the cores of elements Fe through germanium. The core has 8 protons after the
transition elements began. Chemists should consider that no 2s electrons are
expected for Fe, according to this theory. (Transition away from 2s to 8core).
"Octet rule 18": 6 faces times 3 protons on the tip of the pyramid that armors
the face. 6*3=18
Lithium is rare but iron is abundant. Li-7 has 3 protons. When iron is created,
3 protons go on the tips of 6 pyramids that armore 6 faces of a cube 3x3x3.
Those 18 protons are prominently positioned on the outermost regions of a nucleus.
The Octet rule 18 is justified by counting the most salient positive charges.
"Octet rule 32": 6 faces have lines of protons 5 long, or more. Rings of protons are
formed easily on a very heavy element with so many protons. Each of 2 rings has
an axis proton. 32 = 6*5 + 2
Lutetium is an example chemical element that has an octet-32 style. see images of many nuclei, in theory https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/113E-bKKGBYfxiNiNDVDKTpaaPCRyWDBs/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=102023371043899938599&rtpof=true&sd=true
The Octet-32 example of Lu has 2 rings of protons and inside each ring is a line of
axial protons. The 6 faces of lutetium are covered with a pyramid with 4 or 3 layers.
One can see that 5 protons can be chosen as "prominent on the tip of each of 6 pyramids.
32 = 6faces*5protons + 2 axial protons
The 20 Rules of Nuclear Structure feature the cube at the core and the lines of protons.
"The Static Nucleus Theory of the Face-Armored Cubic Lattice" ISBN 9798363495403
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
Rule 1: There is a simple cubic lattice of protons and neutrons at the core of each element thatThe number of "protons" in the nucleus determines the number of electrons in the atom.
has a Z atomic number that is greater than five.
Rule 2: Protons in the cube are far from each other as if electrostatic repulsion is in effect.
Rule 3: The six faces of the cube are armored by pyramids of protons and neutrons.
Rule 4: Protons outside of the cube tend to form lines of protons as if electrostatic repulsion is
not true in all three dimensions.
Rule 5: There are 19 foundation elements upon which the 90 incremental elements are built. The
19 foundation elements are:
carbon, oxygen, neon, phosphorus, argon, iron,
germanium, krypton, zirconium, cadmium, xenon, cerium, hafnium, tungsten, polonium, radon, uranium, mendelevium, and nihonium.
Rule 6: The shapes of foundation elements do not depend on protons being different from
neutrons. Both are treated equally, as baryons, to define the silhouettes and 3D shapes of each
element.
Rule 7: Four sides of the cube have pyramids of the same shape (axial symmetry), for foundation
elements. The top and bottom pyramids can have different sizes. All of the side pyramids are equal
in size and shape. Rotations of pyramids do not need to be identical when positioned on the four
side faces of a cube.
Rule 8: Pyramids should be rotated to avoid creating a three-way intersection of lines of protons.
Some elements cannot avoid that structure, like promethium and nitrogen.
Rule 9: Incremental elements have added nucleons on the exteriors of foundation elements to
fill the gaps between pyramids. There are 90 incremental elements based on the foundation
256
elements. Nine elements are not based on a foundation element. They are H, He, Li, Be, B, Tc, Pm,
Pa, and Og.
Rule 10: An incremental element is assembled by first placing the neutrons into the deepest pits
of a foundation element and then adding one proton into the deepest pit where protons tend to
form lines of protons. If a line cannot be formed, the added proton can go anywhere that does not
join 3 protons together in a triangle. If that is not possible, a proton can go anywhere.
Rule 11: Light elements have a sparse allocation of protons near the center and a denser
allocation of protons near the tips of pyramids.
Rule 12: Pyramids can be up to six layers thick.
Rule 13: Contraction of pyramid bases occurs increasingly with heavier elements. A six-layer
pyramid can rest on a five-layer contracted base, which can reside on a four-layer contracted base,
which can reside in a three-layer cube, nestled into a stable arrangement.
Rule 14: Sphere stacking for a pyramid does not need to nestle into pits of a cube and the pyramid
can be stacked onto a cube vertically. For example, in oxygen, a two-layer pyramid can be stacked
onto a two-layer cube.
Rule 15: Pyramids can have lines of protons plus additional protons at the corners of pyramids to
achieve the Z atomic number that is known by standard science.
Rule 16: Symmetrical arrangements of protons are preferred over non-symmetrical structures.
The same is true for neutrons. The two-layer pyramid sets the example in iron. The cube-2 and cube-
3 are also symmetrical in their allocations of protons and neutrons. Rule 17: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. Z is the atomic number.
Rule 18: Each nucleus is shaped to provide the isotopes with A and Z which were established
from old experiments for established physical tables. A is the mass number. A is equal to the number
of protons plus the number of neutrons. Z is the atomic number. Z is equal to the number of protons
in an element.
Rule 19: Each proton has one electron paired with it using a line of flux. This drives multiple
protons into a single line of protons that touch each other.
Rule 20: The longest distance from each neutron to a proton is one diameter of a neutron.
Probably the position/place of "protons" in the structure of the nucleus determines
the movement of electrons in the atom.
How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?
Ps.Hello Enes Richard,
we must remember that electrons must have the ability to produce not only radiation characteristic
of a given atom. They must also be able to absorb thermal radiation from the environment
and return it back in appropriate non-linear ranges.
You asked, "How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?"
People first look at bonding electrons to discuss the octet rule.
Please equally consider non-bonding electrons to help drive
the octet rule. All electrons in a compound, that has elements from C to Mn,
are located relative to a cubic lattice of protons and neutrons in the core.
The bonding electrons are excluded from where non-bonding electrons are busy.
The combined population of bonding and non-bonding orbitals has a cubic lattice
super-imposed on it. That means 8 corners and 6 faces in a cube.
The non-bonding electrons and orbitals can expand out to the 8 points on a cube.
The bonding electrons are influenced by that, so 8 electrons are counted near
the nuclei. Bonding electrons are between the nuclei and non-bonding are pushed away towards the perimeter of the molecule. That perimeter has 8 corners
because of the hidden cube in the nucleus. That over-all tendency influences the
bonds to be in 8 mirrored locations, away from the 8 points of a cube of non-
bonding electron orbitals.
Conclusion
No matter how complicated the nuclear proton allocation is, the hidden cube
has influence to make 6 charge prominences where 1*6 or 3*6 or 5*6 protons will
be considered by chemists to be bonding. The non-bonding orbitals enforce the cubic structure on the
bonding elecrons. This does not address some possible light molecules without a cube, like Li2Be4H14, where Z<6 for lowest Atomic Numbers.
Do those molecules need an octet rule?
"How do electrons move, especially in groups: 8, 18...?"
We still don't have an answer to this question.
How do these electrons move, in relation to your models of atomic nuclei?
Do they orbit in any orbits around the nucleus?
Or are they moving in some cloud of probability?
Is there any other move? What?
How do they absorb and produce electromagnetic radiation?
On Friday, November 17, 2023 at 10:29:07 AM UTC-5, Alan Folmsbee wrote:lively interpretation cannot by stomached as we require the perfect mimicry of the said tasks reaching far beyond a mere twenty years of programming. And then to top it all off, if you fail to mimic the mimics than you will not be received by the
On Wednesday, November 15, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-5, Timothy Golden wrote:
On Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 7:31:55 AM UTC-5, Enes Richard wrote:
poniedziałek, 13 listopada 2023 o 21:42:56 UTC+1 Alan Folmsbee napisał(a):
Read it, see the images of a scanning electron microscope
picture of a single iron atom on a surface of MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide.)
A triangular shaped iron is, plausibly, the North pole of iron and the South
pole is on the other side. The Three points of each triangle are from the
six-sided cube of protons and neutrons in the core of the nucleus. The six faces of the core of Fe each have a pile of 2 neutrons and
3 protons that make the tips of the triangle!
Fe-57 = 27 + 6*5
The 3x3x3 cube of protons and neutrons has 27 nucleons.
Theory
https://pyramidalcube.blogspot.com/p/evidence.html
Experiment
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article- pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.236801
Physical Review Letters Nov, 2021 Trushin at al
The general idea (cube lines) seems correct. However, the details probably require refinement.I am in favor of taking the atomic model as open. There are far too many 'why?' questions that go upon empirical answers which is to say "That's just the way it is, sonny.", or, to put it another way: "Shut up and compute."
Probably the nucleons do not connect at "points", but the connections are much deeper...
Now, to back off of my own criticism here, we would have to confess that this predicament does in fact expose the state of humanity as regards physics, and confesses that we are at the beginning of physics; rather than nearing the end. That this
that while I want to take the atom as open for theoretical work, it feels beyond me.Alan has been at this for as long as I have been on usenet as I recall. That is some compulsion; no: it is far beyond a compulsive act which he is on here.
I have failed to follow it closely, but in my brief recent readings clearly his position has developed, and honestly the task at hand feels so begrudgingly difficult both in terms of theory and in terms of empirical verification, that I confess
I suffer the same on my polysign numbers. They are bleeding over into physics, and it is my hope that spacetime will embody electromagnetism in an informational melange which places spacetime as a structural feature whose informational complexity canOf course my own insistence on this foreign nature is not at all helpful. How many of us carry this boundary of reception? How many of us have been tuned for a boundary that cannot possibly reinterpret Alan enough to engage in a conversation here?
statement of balance, and while the ordinary real valued equation simply brings something over to the other side like:T = 0
and be done with the whole thing. Stranger still, this equation exposes a factoid via a simple choice or propostion let's say to the reader to adopt this concept of "equals zero" as if it is integral to every mathematical expression. This is a
the pun is true what is one to do with these higher types which posess the lower typology of spacetime? Did I see a five by six in your writing, sir?V - IR,
this Tee equals zero thing at the moment is simply reading:
T.
That is sort of scary in that it then places all of the complexity into the spacetime basis. At least in this moment of my analytical thought this could be the case.
Stranger still, for within the spacetime interpretation of polysign we stop at three or four:
P1 P2 P3 | P4
due to this breakpoint, thus engaging arithmetic support for spacetime including unidirectional time as P1 which are the one-signed numbers, but this progression could carry on, and while the intrigue of P6 is rather more than that of P5, and while
it any different from an acoustic effect? And the speed of sound in that lattice? And the speed of heat in that same lattice? Abysmal, sir, and here lays a most direct proof by contradiction. Of course this then will bleed back onto the states of matter,Hello Timothy,Hey. That would be great. I better follow your threads more closely. Now wait a minute, am I paying you 10k or are you paying me?
The verification of my work should be paid with a one-year treasury.
I want to hire a chemist, mechanical engineer, programmer, and
physicist to make more progress with my theory of proton locations
and neutrons locations. Is $10,000 enough for a month of consulting?
I do have some good coding skills. Surely I am worth more, but chasing dollars isn't really a thing here.
More like grow your own potatoes. Then suddenly you learn that sprinkling wood ashes on them promotes tuber growth..
Who'dathunk? I think my mother thought those ashes were to repel the potato bugs. Double duty, perhaps?
The experimentalists could be far away from correct theory, and yet ride their curve-fit paradise hard, you see?
As to how much physics is led around by a nose ring labeled 'Experimental Beef': it is profound, isn't it.
On a light tether a child can wield the thing. Just keep regurgitating what the teachers tell you and all will be well.
Chew your cud carefully, and swallow.
Really, the idea that you might break free and find some other coherence is plausible.
As to how far off existing theory could be...
Could it be that the more they glom on the farther away they go?
The idea that physics simply accumulates without any grand rewrite is somewhat to blame here.
At least it could be to blame.
Still, to have the rewrite correct will require some very compelling evidence.
Polysign numbers do offer a new lens, and I do recommend them.
Beyond that, thermodynamics is one of these empirical areas. Now loaded with enough *ons to wonder which will be next, solid state physics is not discussing the kinetic problem. In a crystalline lattice what motion exactly accounts for heat, and how is
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
+Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within
3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.
In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor law.
A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.
The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.
Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the other
oxygen and hydrogen".AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.
In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.
Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
proportionality constant Z can be used:You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.
The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.
Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
12:24 AM (13 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
--- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)
m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.
This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.
m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.
--- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???
AP
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.
Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
x/v atoms are discharged.
So the mass m discharged is
m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
where
N_A is the Avogadro constant;
Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
F is the Faraday constant.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.
So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.
So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:14 AM (12 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.
But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.
Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
1:48 AM (11 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Cosmic Rays from Sun
90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.
When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.
I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.
Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?
Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?
So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.
How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
3:11 AM (10 hours ago)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)
I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.
But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.
So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.
There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.
But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.
So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.
I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.
Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?
So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.
If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.
AP
to
So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.
In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".
For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that
realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygenThe world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.
AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C, to
electrolysis of water.When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)
to
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.
Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
10:01 AM (5 hours ago)
to
So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.
To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.
The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".
No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.
I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of
properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.
AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
12:38 PM (4 hours ago)
to
So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.
Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some other
AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.
Chemistry Europe--
"The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...
P Vermeeren, 2023
"The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
"The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."
AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?
AP
My 250th published book.
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely a
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
Preface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistrytextbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possible
Cover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Watermolecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons are
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 505 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 84:57:12 |
| Calls: | 9,934 |
| Files: | 13,813 |
| Messages: | 6,348,179 |