From: plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com   
      
   #6page   
      
   #6page   
      
   On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 5:50:29 PM UTC-6, Archimedes Plutonium wrote   
   in sci.physics:   
   Radioactivity rewritten Re: Chemists are smarter than Physicists-- 2018   
   textbook of Experiment-- Real Electron = 105MeV   
   9th Proof. In Chemistry, it is rare, that a atom loses or gains any   
   Real-Electron=muon.    
   And that is a 9th proof that Real Electron=muon, that beta decay in Old   
   Physics, was not the electron of atoms but the transfer of Magnetic Monopoles.    
   The only real radioactive decay mode is the helium nucleus-- alpha decay and   
   the hydrogen atom decay= 840MeV proton plus its 105MeV electron= muon, which   
   in Old Physics and Old Chemistry would be seen as neutron decay.   
   But there is never a Real Electron decay for that would mean muons spewed out   
   of atoms. Nor do we see protons spewed out of atoms, Real Proton = 840 MeV.   
   The so called hydrogen nucleus of a 938 MeV is not radioactive decay, for it   
   is still a 840 proton +    
   105 muon = hydrogen atom.    
      
   So, all the books on Radioactivity need to be rewritten.   
      
      
   On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 7:26:52 PM UTC-6, Archimedes Plutonium wrote   
   in sci.physics:   
   proton and electron=muon arrangement inside atoms Re: Chemists are smarter   
   than Physicists-- 2018 textbook of Experiment-- Real Electron = 105MeV   
      
   10th Proof. Well, I spoke of the internal heart or core of the concept of   
   Chemistry, that the proton/s and electron/s are two parts of the Faraday Law.   
   The protons are the thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= muons forms the   
   closed loop of wire. But,    
   however, the proton itself is a closed loop wire due to its being a   
   composition of 8 muons, in a octet of muons, thus the electron-muon is the bar   
   magnet and the proton is the closed loop wire.   
      
   Either way, Faradays law is preeminent, either the proton is the bar magnet   
   and electron is the closed loop wire or the proton is the closed loop wire and   
   electron is the bar magnet.    
      
   Essentially that is the heart and core of atomic physics, a replay of   
   Faraday's law with protons and electrons.    
      
   But, however, the electrons= muons only forms a closed loop wire for Faraday's   
   law in the inert gases, the helium, neon, argon, etc and all other atoms want   
   to have that closed loop configuration. Thus, is borne the Chemistry of   
   bonding. Chemistry is    
   borne. So that one atom without a closed loop configuration bonds with another   
   atom to achieve that goal. So chemistry bonding is that of muons bonded to   
   other muons in different atoms.    
        
   Now, can these .5 MeV particles fulfill the atoms need to make their muons a   
   closed loop? Obviously not, because ions of atoms such as Fe, iron, swing from   
   -4 to +7 in ions, so that proves ions cannot solve a atom's problem of its   
   electron structure    
   being less than closed loop. Only muons of other atoms can fulfill a atom's   
   need to be closed loop.    
      
   Which begs the question, how and why are monopoles borne inside of atoms?   
      
      
   On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 9:40:59 PM UTC-6, Archimedes Plutonium wrote   
   in sci.physics:   
   solving muon magnetic moment anomaly   
   11th Proof. Solving the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly, alongside proton radius   
   shrunk    
    --- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom,   
   confirm physics is broken ---    
      
   So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work   
   point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some   
   of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve   
   scattering muons off    
   protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter   
   would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to   
   explain this puzzle.    
    --- end Quote ---    
        
   Now in re-reading that Ars article on proton radius shrinking when a hydrogen   
   atom of 840 MeV proton with electron = 105 MeV and then a second muon is tried   
   to be compounded-- will of course, shrink the proton radius for the two muons   
   with 1 proton all    
   three are centered at the center of the proton.    
      
   But in re-reading was mentioned an anomaly I was not familiar with-- Muon   
   Magnetic Moment Anomaly.    
      
   And reading some results of that, I find surprizing for it was Feynman who   
   claimed Electrodynamics was the supreme physics theory in accuracy of   
   prediction.    
      
   But the anomaly is off by a mere .1%, which seems very very small to be not   
   even an anomaly. Trouble is, the electron of Old Physics was found to be so   
   accurate as to be described as physic's most precise finding ever, and that   
   makes the .1% discrepancy    
   ever so much larger.    
      
   Now, I was able to explain away the proton radius anomaly because the proton   
   is not 938 MeV but is 840 MeV and the electron is not the .5MeV particle but   
   rather is 105 MeV.    
      
   So, can I explain away the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly. I believe I can   
   easily. For if you consider that what Old Physics measured as the electron   
   magnetic moment was none other than the monopole as a dressed up photon   
   magnetic moment. And it is easily    
   seen that in EM theory the permeability constant is "exact" no uncertainty at   
   1.26*10^-6 H/m.    
      
   So, it is no wonder that Old Physics thought their electron magnetic moment in   
   Quantum Electrodynamics was so ultra ultra precise-- for, they never measured   
   the magnetic moment of the electron, but instead a magnetic monopole of the   
   dressed up .5 MeV    
   particle.    
      
   Then, when it came time to measure the magnetic moment of the muon, the   
   real-true-electron, there is this .1% discrepancy, but there are discrepancies   
   in the proton and neutron etc.    
      
   So, once we realized the Real Electron is the muon, afterall, there is no   
   magnetic moment anomaly.    
      
      
   On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 12:41:50 AM UTC-6, Archimedes Plutonium wrote   
   in sci.physics:   
   static electricity makes no sense as removal of electrons Re: Chemists are   
   smarter than Physicists-- 2018 textbook of Experiment-- Real Electron = 105MeV   
   12th proof -- Static Electricity Re: Proofs that the Real Electron=muon   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)