Be ready for next level of science

[truedream]

so what does thsi all mean?

no way, we must be ready for next level of science

[Mister Earl]

Truedream, please answer NEOWatcher's questions. I want to hear your answers as much as he does!

[NEOWatcher]

Truedream, please answer NEOWatcher's questions. I want to hear your answers as much as he does!

Originally fortis's question (from what I can tell) and I hope I gave him previous credit.

But; aside from that, it does not diminish the fact that I am anxiously awaiting an answer, because I thought it was an excellent question.

[Swift]

Originally Posted by Mister Earl
Truedream, please answer NEOWatcher's questions. I want to hear your answers as much as he does!

Originally fortis's question (from what I can tell) and I hope I gave him previous credit.

But; aside from that, it does not diminish the fact that I am anxiously awaiting an answer, because I thought it was an excellent question.

And I asked similar questions in posts 25 and 57. In case you have forgotten:

Please list which elements are members of the gas family and which are in the solid family in your theory and give examples of how your theory explains bonding and properties of compunds formed from these two groups.

Tell us for all the elements in the periodic table which atoms are in which class.

Truedream, you need to answer these questions - again, if you are not familiar with them, you need to look at the rules of this board, particularly those for the ATM forum.

[Serenitude]

Truedream - your next posts to the forum will be answers to posts #'s 25, 57, and 89. And as has been suggested, you may wish to visit the "About BAUT" forum and familiarize yourself with the rules here, before it results in unfortunate actions for failure to answer direct and pertinent questions

[truedream]

Truedream, you need to answer these questions - again, if you are not familiar with them, you need to look at the rules of this board, particularly those for the ATM forum.

Yes i am new to forum, i am ready to answer every one but the problem is present science see atom in different view but i see in different view.

I asked you or others to start with quantum mechanical spin, but no one is ready or able to understand quantum mechanical spin.

How can you understand my view of atom, you don’t know the basic of atom
(Quantum mechanical spin) but my theory has the base of quantum mechanical spin. When you zoom in you see quantum mechanical spin and when you zoom out You can see solar system both have same principle.

You see atom as mass but i see atom as magnetic atom, we two have more different in between us then how can explain you about my view

More over physics and chemistry will come under my theory.

[truedream]

Truedream - you are required to answer all direct and pertinent questions posed to you here. Members are under no obligation to do your homework for you. Also, lay off of the ad-hominems. This is an official warning.

i am ready to answer questions which have valid points or who understand what i am speaking, i am not doing any home work at my home but wating for good replys

[papageno]

Yes i am new to forum, i am ready to answer every one but the problem is present science see atom in different view but i see in different view.

You started the thread, so it is up to you to explain your point of view, no matter what the mainstream's view is.

I asked you or others to start with quantum mechanical spin, but no one is ready or able to understand quantum mechanical spin.

I have given you a reference and you said that you were just making rhetorical questions, completely avoiding the point you raised.

How can you understand my view of atom, you don’t know the basic of atom
(Quantum mechanical spin)...

What makes you think we don't know?

...but my theory has the base of quantum mechanical spin.

I doubt it. Your "atom A" and "atom B" has little resemblance to QM explanation of atoms and spin.

When you zoom in you see quantum mechanical spin and when you zoom out You can see solar system both have same principle.

Wrong.
We have known for a hundred years that a classical system such as the Solar System is not a good model for atoms.

You see atom as mass but i see atom as magnetic atom, we two have more different in between us then how can explain you about my view

You are not even trying to explain.
You are just mumbling about "atom A" and "atom B" and spin.

And you obviously have little understanding about the mainstream view of the atom. You should spend more time in the Questions & Answers forum and in a university library.

More over physics and chemistry will come under my theory.

I seriously doubt it.

[NEOWatcher]

I asked you or others to start with quantum mechanical spin, but no one is ready or able to understand quantum mechanical spin.

There are a lot of smart people here. If it is a mainstream concept, then they will understand the answer.
If not, then they will ask specific questions to get the understanding.

You will not know until you attempt to answer it.

[Serenitude]

i am ready to answer questions which have valid points or who understand what i am speaking, i am not doing any home work at my home but wating for good replys

Truedream - you were given an official warning concerning both your behavior in the thread and your failure to answer direct and pertinent questions posed to you. Although your behavior has improved (and kudos to you!), you have still failed to answer questions. To motivate and facilitate you, I gave you instructions on which questions to immediately answer to retain your standing.

In reply, you have stated to me that you are only going to reply to questions that you consider valid, or from members who you feel "understand" you, and are waiting for "good" replies.

Let me clarify once again. All replies are "good" as far as your thread is concerned. If you are in doubt, PM a moderator as to wether you should be accountable to answer a specific question. As far as the BAUT forum ATM section is concerned, you have no authority to filter your answers. You will either answer all challenges in a timely manner, or withdraw your ATM claim. "I don't know" is a valid answer.

To give you some time to mull this over, and to familiarize yourself with with the BAUT forum rules, in particular rule 13, which I shall post below for your convenience, you are banned for 24 hours. Failure to answer the posts you were directed to reply to by myself, as well as other relevant questions, will result in further bannings, to be determined by the moderator handling the event and the degree of transgression.

Rule 13:

3. Alternative Concepts and Conspiracy Theories

If you have some idea which goes against commonly-held astronomical theory, or think UFOs are among us, then you are welcome to argue it here. Before you do, though READ THIS THREAD FIRST. This is very important. Then, if you still want to post your idea, you will do so politely, you will not call people names, and you will defend your arguments. Direct questions must be answered in a timely manner.

People will attack your arguments with glee and fervor here; that's what science and scientists do. If you cannot handle that sort of attack, then maybe you need to rethink your theory, too. Remember: you came here. It's our job to attack new theories. Those that are strong will survive, and may become part of mainstream science.

Additionally, keep promotion of your theories and ideas to only those Against the Mainstream or Conspiracy Theory threads which discuss them. Hijacking other discussions to draw attention to your ideas will not be allowed.

If it appears that you are using circular reasoning, depending on long-debunked arguments, or breaking any of these other rules, you will receive one warning, and if that warning goes unheeded, you will be banned.

As with the other sections of the forum, we ask you to keep your topics about space and astronomy. We will close down any thread which doesn't have anything to do with space and astronomy immediately.

In the meantime, I would like to discourage discussion of this theory, except to pose further questions for truedreamer, for the next 24 hours, as he will be unable to respond until then.

[tusenfem]

How can you understand my view of atom, you don’t know the basic of atom
(Quantum mechanical spin) but my theory has the base of quantum mechanical spin. When you zoom in you see quantum mechanical spin and when you zoom out You can see solar system both have same principle.

Truedream, I do hope you understand that the quantum mechanical spin is a badly chosen word in mainstream, because it does not represent a physical spin of the particle. A better name should have been found, e.g. the "upness" of the particle (however, that would be confusing because of the up quark, ah well). A comforting thought for you may be that lots of people think that the particle really rotates, and in many a book you will find pictures with the electron spinning.

So, zooming out to look at the solar system I will see rotating planets, but that is not a representation of non-rotating elementary particles.

[truedream]

I'm sorry, but this make no sense at all and does not agree with the last 200 years or so of research in chemistry. There are no such things as "solid atoms" and "gas atoms", any element can be a solid or a gas, depending on temperature and pressure. And the nature of bonding in chemical compounds is extremely well understood and has nothing to do with what you describe.

Please list which elements are members of the gas family and which are in the solid family in your theory and give examples of how your theory explains bonding and properties of compunds formed from these two groups.

Some of important points about my theory
Why earth has orbital axis???
Not only earth has axis, even every atom has its magnetic axis.
I divide atoms into two different family, one is gas family (A) other is solid family (B).
The difference is based upon there magnetic property.
So the type of atom is directly proportional to the magnetic property of atom (magnetic axis)
I say pure A type of atom can only exist only at the core of sun.
Like wise pure B type of atom only exist only at the core of planet.

For eg: earth’s solid core is made of this pure B type of atom
This pure B type has maximum of its magnetic force and this magnetic force keep on reducing when we move from inner core, outer core, mantle, and crust. The arrangement or order of existence of inner core, outer core, mantle, and crust are proportional to its magnetic property.

So maximum of atom we have discovered till now belongs to intermediate atom group. The magnetic axis of this intermediate atom are very flexible when compare to pure A and B type atom, so temperature and pressure can only effect this intermediate atom.

How the atoms are arrange in our earth, gravity (solid core), semi gravity (outer core, mantle, and crust) and finally is semi anti gravity (atmosphere)

My original question still stands, however.

If I had an atom in front of me, how do I determine if it is a type A or a type B atom?

Let's take an example, is an atom of mercury a type A atom, and why?

So till now we have not discovered pure B type and pure A type, but only we have seen maximum of intermediate atoms.

The atom which reacts against its gravity when there are some changes at temperature belongs to semi anti gravity. So when we compare mercury, its mainly intermediate atoms which has semi character of A and B atom.but with some changes in Proportion.

For eg : we can say mercury has 55% character of A and 45% character of B atom.

[papageno]

Not only earth has axis, even every atom has its magnetic axis.

Nope, the helium atom in its ground state has no magnetic moment.

I divide atoms into two different family, one is gas family (A) other is solid family (B).
The difference is based upon there magnetic property.
So the type of atom is directly proportional to the magnetic property of atom (magnetic axis)
I say pure A type of atom can only exist only at the core of sun.
Like wise pure B type of atom only exist only at the core of planet.

You keep repeating the same words, but I still see no answer to the question.

[Gillianren]

For eg : we can say mercury has 55% character of A and 45% character of B atom.

Sure we can! We can also say that it's made of subatomic puppies, but that doesn't make it true. Can you explain how you know your idea to be true, or are we dealing with subatomic puppies?

[Fortis]

For eg : we can say mercury has 55% character of A and 45% character of B atom.

How did you determine this? Why 55% of type A and not 60% of type A?

[truedream]

Nope, the helium atom in its ground state has no magnetic moment.

No, helium atom has powerful nucleus magnetic moment which is directly opposite to earth’s magnetic moment (gravity).

eg:works as like poles of bar magnet reples

The atom which reacts against its gravity when there are some changes at temperature belongs to semi anti gravity atom . So when we compare helium, its mainly semi anti gravity atoms which has semi character of A and B atom.but with some changes in Proportion.

For eg aprox: we can say helium has 75% character of A (gas)and 25% character of B atom(solid).

[papageno]

No, helium atom has powerful nucleus magnetic moment which is directly opposite to earth’s magnetic moment (gravity).

So, you are not actually talking about the atoms, but about the nuclei.
Then why do you keep talking about atoms? Shouldn't you speak of "nuclei of type A" and "nuclei of type B"?

By the way, the nuclear magnetic moment is about three orders of magnitude smaller than the atomic magnetic moment due to the electrons. So I wouldn't call it "powerful".

[Fortis]

No, helium atom has powerful nucleus magnetic moment which is directly opposite to earth’s magnetic moment (gravity).

eg:works as like poles of bar magnet reples

We've seen other proposals along these lines, i.e. gravity is some sort of interaction between magnetic dipoles, like your bar magnet. One of the things that spoils this idea is that the force between two magnets (dipoles) falls off as 1/r³, whereas the force of gravity does a very good impression of falling off as 1/r[sup2[/sup]. How do you explain this?

[Swift]

No, helium atom has powerful nucleus magnetic moment which is directly opposite to earth’s magnetic moment (gravity).

eg:works as like poles of bar magnet reples

The atom which reacts against its gravity when there are some changes at temperature belongs to semi anti gravity atom . So when we compare helium, its mainly semi anti gravity atoms which has semi character of A and B atom.but with some changes in Proportion.

For eg aprox: we can say helium has 75% character of A (gas)and 25% character of B atom(solid).

Truedream,
You continue to just state things as fact with absolutely no evidence of any of it. Please provide empirical evidence of your statement about helium (75% A, 25% B).

[Fortis]

Truedream,
You continue to just state things as fact with absolutely no evidence of any of it. Please provide empirical evidence of your statement about helium (75% A, 25% B).

I second this. Truedream, why do you choose the percentages that you do? In my earlier post, I asked you to explain why

mercury has 55% character of A and 45% character of B atom

I am still looking forward to your answer.

[Gillianren]

It's subatomic puppies all the way down, I tells ya!

[Celestial Mechanic]

It's subatomic puppies all the way down, I tells ya!

Actually, it's 55% subatomic puppies and 45% subatomic kittens all the way down.

[Swift]

It's subatomic puppies all the way down, I tells ya!

That was great Gillian.

Wouldn't Subatomic Puppies be a great name for a band?

By the way, googling "subatomic puppies" - this thread is the first hit and the image search finds this Chihuahua named Quark.

[Gillianren]

Actually, it's 55% subatomic puppies and 45% subatomic kittens all the way down.

You're quite right. My mistake. D would be giving me a surly look about that error, were he awake.

[Van Rijn]

Actually, it's 55% subatomic puppies and 45% subatomic kittens all the way down.

But . . . but . . . won't anyone think of the turtles?

[truedream]

So, you are not actually talking about the atoms, but about the nuclei.
Then why do you keep talking about atoms? Shouldn't you speak of "nuclei of type A" and "nuclei of type B"?

By the way, the nuclear magnetic moment is about three orders of magnitude smaller than the atomic magnetic moment due to the electrons. So I wouldn't call it "powerful".

I have sad many times, check this posts #12 #32
even i am not taking about nuclear magnetic moment and i am taking about nuclear magnetic force (source of gravity ), truely powerfull than atomic magnetic moment due to the electrons.

[truedream]

Sure we can! We can also say that it's made of subatomic puppies, but that doesn't make it true. Can you explain how you know your idea to be true, or are we dealing with subatomic puppies?

Yes what you say is true present science have only seen the nature in the way of
Sub atomic puppies but my theory some thing dealing with dogs and cats (next level).

Ok I will show how to see next level. Simplified atom model and with some changes in basic understanding of atom will help you to see next level.

Let us simplify atom as it is made of two basic particles one nucleus and other is electrons, so atom is divided by two building blocks and forget about sub atomic puppies because they are useless when compare to new atomic model. Mainly we are going to see the force of atom, forces of two building blocks, .


Let us see atom as magnetic atom, what is the source of this magnetic property?
Source is nucleus and electrons, nucleus and electrons are two magnetic particles.So there are two magnetic forces in atom, primary is nucleus magnetic forces and secondary is electrons magnetic forces.
Why this two magnetic particle nucleus and electrons did not combine together?
What is reason for gap in-between nucleus and electrons?
Because nucleus and electrons have the magnetic force which are opposite to each other.So, nucleus and electrons works like a couples.

Atom has two physical characteristics, one is mass of atom and other is magnetic force of atom. This magnetic force of atom is very important or primary physical characteristics for nature and mass of atom is secondary characteristics for nature. Nature takes care or collects only magnetic force of atom and don’t take care of the mass of atom.

[Gillianren]

Yes what you say is true present science have only seen the nature in the way of
Sub atomic puppies but my theory some thing dealing with dogs and cats (next level).

Okay, you totally missed my point. You said we "could say" that it works your way. I said we "could say" practically anything. The point is to show that it's how things are, not what we could say. The mainstream remains completely silent on the subject of subatomic puppies, I think you'll find.

In short, why do you think this is the way this works? How do you determine the makeup of an atom in your system? These are very simple questions, and until you answer them, there will be no reasonable way of saying that your system describes the world better than any other system of randomly assigning words to meaningless concepts.

[papageno]

I have sad many times, check this posts #12 #32

It does not matter how many times you repeat the same words. We asked you for explanation and evidence.

even i am not taking about nuclear magnetic moment and i am taking about nuclear magnetic force (source of gravity ),

Sorry?

No, helium atom has powerful nucleus magnetic moment which is directly opposite to earth’s magnetic moment (gravity).

Are you again changing the meaning of words that already have a very specific meaning in physics?

truely powerfull than atomic magnetic moment due to the electrons.

That's why the nuclear magnetic moment is responsible for hyperfine structure in atomic spectra, instead of the magnetism of materials, right?

[Fortis]

I have sad many times, check this posts #12 #32
even i am not taking about nuclear magnetic moment and i am taking about nuclear magnetic force (source of gravity ), truely powerfull than atomic magnetic moment due to the electrons.

A magnetic moment is the "source" of the magnetic interaction in the same way that charge is the soure of the electrostatic interaction.

The force between two magnets follows a 1/r³ law, whereas the gravitational force between two masses follows a 1/r² law. Please explain how you can show that gravity is a magnetic effect.

While you do that, you may also want to answer my earlier question

Originally Posted by truedream
For eg : we can say mercury has 55% character of A and 45% character of B atom.

How did you determine this? Why 55% of type A and not 60% of type A?