Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 21:43:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Page3, 1-3, What is the Atomic theory of Matter// PLUTO
IUM-ATOM-TOTALITY-UNIVERSE
8th ed. 2017
From: Archimedes Plutonium
Injection-Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 05:43:12 +0000
Page3, 1-3, What is the Atomic theory of Matter// PLUTONIUM-ATOM
TOTALITY-UNIVERSE 8th ed. 2017
The Atomic Theory of science is perhaps the oldest science theory that is
true, 2200 years ago, that basically was as true then as it is today without
much changing or altering. It was first offered by the Ancient Greeks starting
with Leucippus and then
his most famous student of Democritus, and then followed by Epicurus, and then
to Titus Lucretius who wrote a poem on the Atomic theory. Hard to imagine that
poetry comes into the most famous science theory of all science theories.
I cannot think of a single science theory that survived the test of time as
well as the Atomic Theory. Large parts of Newtonian physics, his gravity law
of 1687 lasted just a mere 330 years when AP's EM Gravity replaced it. So by
comparison we have a
Atomic theory mostly unchanged for 2200 years and a gravity theory replaced
that lasts only 330 years.
So the Atomic Theory is special in the history of science, for its duration
and for it being the center of physics and chemistry. In later pages, I argue
the Atomic theory is the center of mathematics and logic also.
So what is the Atomic Theory of Democritus and what is it today?
Democritus said words to the effect: "The only things that exist are atoms and
the void".
Now I ask you. None of us dispute that whenever we point to a material
object we know it is composed of atoms. When we point to mass and
matter we know it is composed of atoms. Even the gases and air we
breathe on Earth are made of atoms.
And what is the modern day Atomic Theory, and here I point to the statement of
Feynman:
--- quoting ---
The Feynman Lectures on Physics, 1963
page 1-2
If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and
only one sentence passed on to the next generations of creatures, what
statement would contain the most information in the fewest words? I believe it
is the Atomic hypothesis (
or the atomic fact, or whatever you wish to call it) that All things are made
up of atoms-- little particles that move around in perpetual motion,
attracting each other when they are a little distance apart, but repelling
upon being squeezed into one
another.
--- end quote ---
So we have no trouble with either Democritus or Feynman in understanding the
Atomic theory. But there is trouble, and the trouble comes when we ask what
about the Universe itself as a entity, a structure. Is it a non-entity and
structureless. Or, is it a
atom, a single atom which would complete the Logic. Which would push the
Atomic theory of Democritus and as the Feynman statement, push the Atomic
Theory to its ultimate and total maximum, to its end conclusion of pushing to
the idea that if All things
are atoms, then the Universe itself, being a thing, must be an atom.
Archimedes Plutonium after 1990 said " All Matter is made up of singular
atoms, and the Universe, matter itself, has to be one big atom". What
chemical element is this Universe we live in? That was the gigantic question
on my mind the morning of
7NOV1990 when I discovered the Atom Totality theory. What chemical element is
the Universe.
The greatest criticism towards scientists is their lack of logic. Their
inability to assemble or recognize a logical argument and how they stick to
their dirty error filled opinion, rather than accept logic. A chief blame of
this lack of logic is that
the schools of higher education never require logic as a prerequisite to being
a scientist. Most scientists have never taken formal logic in their university
schooling, and learned how to start to think clearly. This forces me to
amplify these first
pages, seeing the horrible lack of logic in sci.physics as I introduced this
in sci.physics in Spring of 2016.
And the second greatest shortfall of scientists is their logical inability to
correctly *interpret* the experiment data or observation data. I spoke of the
Born Interpretation of the atom electron=muon earlier, but the interpretation
of science data is a
frightening lack of ability by most. How they so easily misinterpret the data,
which is evident in a later page on the subject of a repelling force or a
denial of the same space occupancy of two bar magnets.
When I was a teenager in school there was a joke spreading around. I hate the
joke because it involves the torture of animals such as a grasshopper, and I
request no-one does this joke for it is a sin to torture animals, sin, sin,
sin. But I never heard
any joke more apt to describe a scientist lacking a logical mind. The joke
goes like this-- a scientist studies grasshoppers and says "jump hopper jump"
and the hopper jumps. Then the scientist pulls off one of the hoppers legs and
says "jump hopper jump"
and the hopper jumps a little bit with its remaining leg. Finally the
scientist pulls off the other large leg and says "jump hopper jump" and the
hopper just stands there. So the scientist concludes that by pulling off the
two large legs of grasshopper
makes the hopper deaf in his ears. Now we all laugh at that joke because the
truth is the hopper cannot jump because his means of jumping is removed. But
you would be surprised that much of modern day science is the mi
interpretation of the facts, data,
and observations. Much of astronomy with its fakery of black holes, dark
matter, dark energy is misinterpretation. Much of particle physics with its
fakery of Higgs boson is misinterpretation of particle tracks. The recent
gravity waves device of LIGO,
is a misinterpretation of data.
So, Logic is a terrible mess by most scientists, and I recommend they take
formal logic courses in University to help them think better, to think more
clearly.
Well, Feynman makes two mistakes in his Lectures on the Atomic theory.
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
