Atoms as little galaxies, galaxies as large atoms

Love Dr. Seuss.

On sci.physics right now:

What WOULD work, however, and it is
very similar to what you are saying, is if
all matter gave out a PUSH in all directions, and all
matter absorbed an equal amount of PUSH from all
directions. Then you do the whole LeSage thing, and if it is
electron radiations at a smaller scale and higher
speed, that works great! The protons absorb the
gravitation/inertia and feed their electrons, which need to be
fed constantly because they RADIATE.

There! Matter causes gravitation, but not
local matter, so you do away with Black Holes and
you have a limit to how much gravity
can be experienced on a planet. Now that you have this
limit, you have a lot of unseen matter at planet/suns’ centers,
and larger bodies appear to be much less dense than
they are. So if you were to have a larger planet, such as
Saturn, Jupiter, or Neptune, or a Sun, it would appear to be
mostly gaseous when in fact it is rock and lava just like us.

Hmmm. Missing matter.

john

Okay, I’m just rambling using large-scale
to fill in blanks about small scale and vice-versa,
based on the assumption that atoms are little galaxies
and galaxies are large atoms.

You have a neutrino flux coming from all the
stars. This energy passes through from all sides
all the time, everywhere. Now we’re saying electrons
are made from a billion stars in that little galaxy that is an atom.
So, we also have a flux of energy just like neutrinos,
but 10^27 times smaller, although also 10^27 times more
numerous, coming through everywhere
from all sides.

This smaller flux pushes on protons and is absorbed
by them to feed the electrons. Gravity? Sure
looks like it. These could be
the ‘ultra-mundane’ particles required for LeSage Gravity.
Meanwhile, the neutrino flux goes right through matter
but must be being absorbed by galactic centers,
and therefore pushing on them.
So it will be the neutrino flux that is pushing
galaxies apart. Dark Energy? Neutrinos.

john

But a major part of this idea is that
atoms possess intelligence- and therefore MEMORY.

What is that ‘science’ where they dilute and dilute?
Perhaps the memory of the drug is all that’s
needed, and a cure takes place at a deeper level?

john

Anyway, pretty soon after I got the idea that
atoms must possess intelligence, I realized that
no two molecules can be alike. When our body
takes proteins apart and re-constitutes them
as our own tissue, there is a memory of what
they were. That memory can be good or it can
be bad. If it’s bad, then your body could have issues
down the road.

john

Interesting thoughts, hooper. Just letting you know that at least somebody (me) is reading them.

Aw!
Thank you, Anon!

Check out what I just found with
the Benzene construction-
This view is a split-screen of my
Benzene construction at 320 degrees
of ring rotation showing
a SouthEast viewpoint on the left and
a NorthWest viewpoint on the right.
users.accesscomm.ca/john/bb320.jpg

The only thing that changes are the
disc numbers and the origin arrows!!

I could animate this and view it from
any two diametrically-opposed viewpoints,
and the two images would be identical!

Freak me out!

john

I’m about half-way through
constructing the above animation-
the SE/NW split-screen of my
Benzene construction.

It will either be intriguing or boring.
If intriguing, I’ll look at a SW/NE split-screen,
maybe.

The fact that this ring arrangement
remains identical for any two
backwards/forwards viewpoints is
extremely encouraging for the atom/galaxy
concept. I will post the upcoming animation
as soon as it is finished.

john

Okay, here’s my Benzene structure wherein
30 electrons are traded continuously seen from
two opposite sides:
users.accesscomm.ca/john/BenzeneF.GIF

I set it to run one frame every five seconds
so it can be seen clearly how the two
views are completely identical. This is true
for this complex multidirectional structure from
any two opposing viewpoints.

Score!

john

Still trying to explain the galaxy/atom
structure at its most basic:

There are three orthogonal axes
around which rotation can occur
at each size level. It is Time that
allows this rotation. :slight_smile:

Photons rotate around two of these axes
while translating along the third
so are essentially two-dimensional
(at each size-level).

Matter rotates around all three axes
and so is stationary

The first rotation defines the line.
The second rotation defines the disc,
and it can be clockwise or counterclockwise
according to the first rotation.
The third rotation defines the sphere, and makes
the whole symmetrical with itself.

Because the second rotation has two choices- an up and
a down so to speak- there are two opposite
electrons- fundamentally opposite in terms of
their spin- at each end of an orbital.

john
galaxy model

The interesting things about fractal intelligent-life
populated galaxy/atoms are many.

There are 160 billion planets in the Milky Way.
If the Milky Way is a Carbon atom, there are
10^27 similar atoms in a human body.

Now, if all these Carbon atoms in our body have intelligent
life in them, being as how they are fractals of us and
our surroundings, this intelligent life will certainly be
“in our own image”.

“We” are each “God” to all of the 16 X !0^37 planets
in our bodies.

Now, granted, the lifetimes on these planets are
only an eyeblink in our time, but knowledge can
be passed on, and if we are good gods to
our 16 X 10^37 planets, the miriad intelligent beings
within us will protect us and inform us, if we have ears.

john
galaxy model for the atom

The Universe is a fractal.

And at each level of the fractal there is matter and
radiant energies to do with that matter.

The radiant energies coming from electron matter
result in gravity and inertia because they are
selectively absorbed by protons.

The radiant energies coming from stars result
in expansion of the space between galaxies
because they are selectively absorbed by
galactic centers.

So, it follows that we ourselves are
also fractals, whose forms at each level
are composed of the atomic building
blocks of that level. Each of us has
gazillions of little us-es inside. :slight_smile:

john
galaxy model

This is my latest crack at elucidating Benzene:
users.accesscomm.ca/john/Benzene.GIF
john

Well, regardless of the Benzine issue;

A) it is provable that one cannot carry the analogy downscale (having nothing to do with Plank).
B) what causes a sub atomic particle to be a particle and behave as it does is not present in the form of a galaxy or even a planet.
C) QM is a distractive joke played on Science.

But as far as our observable universe being merely a “puff of smoke” on a larger scale, I can’t see how such could not be true. It is highly unlikely that galaxies would establish any kind of molecular type structure on any scale anywhere close to that of atoms, but on the other hand, they cannot avoid being a structure of some kind.

I wondered myself as to whether there is a vastly larger life form of which we would be too insignificant to even discover. But at this point, I really have no principles to guide me concerning that issue except to say that greater has no choice but to exist. As to what it might look like on that scale, I have no idea.

Hi James
I wonder how you can limit smaller and then say this?

Can something very small have intelligence?
john

Hi there john,
In Rational Metaphysics, I begin with the most fundamental concepts involved in the issue of existence. From there, I build. But it isn’t very long before the notion of particles forming is a necessary aspect of those fundamental principles. Now what that ends up meaning is that the most fundamental principles of any existence must cause said particles to form (for any universe that is going to exist). At that point, no Science or physics is involved. It is pure definitional logic.

But as it turns out, those particles absolutely must behave (due to the logic) in a manner that exactly describes what contemporary physics has observed as the behavior of real physical particles. The number of elements of similarity are very many and there are none left out such as to imply that perhaps the logical derivation doesn’t exactly match the physics observation. So a foundation of understanding of the very logically required nature of sub-atomic particles is revealed, the “why” behind every aspect; why positive and negative attract, why electrons don’t crash into protons, why light travels at that particular speed, why all particles of a specific type are the same size, and so on.

Now that alone doesn’t tell you that it is necessary that the “metaparticles” derived from definitional logic must be the most fundamental and also the same as the physics observed particles. But there is another issue that does.

If you were to attempt to cause physics particles to simulate on a higher scale, their same behavior (to form megaparticles), you could not arrange it. The actual physics particles do not form particles of a higher scale except in crude ways that are easily distinguishable from physics particles. The analogy doesn’t work sufficiently to cause a higher level perspective of the exact same thing. Now what that means is that the metaparticles could not do that either. Thus it means that the metaparticles could not be representing a form of particle that was merely on a lower scale as those of the physics particles and just happen to be exactly similar. It means that the metaparticles that were born of the most fundamental concerns of reality are in fact the same particles witnessed in contemporary physics and there can be nothing on a lower perspective scale. In a since, if you try to reduce the particle analogy down a little, you run into principles that forbid any particle from forming.

But now as far as going very far up to the galactic scale, it is easy to see that galaxies do not behave as small particles behave. They do not have quantized sizes or charges, for example. And because of these differences, they cannot form atoms and molecules that would represent merely a higher perspective.

So in the long run, you have that you cannot go lower in perspective because you run into fundamental principles forbidding any kind of particles from forming at all and if you go higher in perspective, you run into resultant behavior that does not replicate those of the smaller behaviors. So you are stuck on a unique level of perspective that cannot be replicated either higher or lower.

Sorry if I rushed through that too quickly. I have a hard time trying to explain deeply complex things in a quick post in such a way that they are easily seen as true.

Not in the since that you are probably thinking, no. Intelligence requires specific memory and algorithm functions that have no room to be occurring else things like particles could not form. Particles form due to a relatively simple set of principles. To have intelligence on that level would require that the entire set of atoms and molecules and all of the complexity of a brain be established even before a particle got formed from their alliance.

It is fun to think of such things, but I’m afraid the logic forbids the real possibility of them.

James-
It would seem that, to
you, smaller is simpler until one arrives
at these crude building blocks which
are not replicated in what we see with
our telescopes, so you reject the fractal idea.

Here, let me explain photon formation to you
using fractal:

The ‘fractal emr’ emitted by electrons is
replaced by what their protons absorb,
but when there is more being absorbed by
the protons than emitted by the electron, it is
accreted on each side of the proton as a
pair of photons until they are large enough
to repel each other away.

So when atoms are packed tight and or heated,
they are constantly accreting the excess energy
and kicking it loose when it gets big enough
as pairs of newly-minted photons, which are made from
large numbers of accreted ‘fractal neutrinos’.

So, in this single-disc spinning scenario,
the positive charge and negative charges repel
each other magnetically, since they are always
spinning the same way. So as the proton accretes, its
magnetic repulsion forces the electron arms to
extend. When they get to the next optimum orbit,
where they start to ride their own wave again,
they suddenly push back less hard on the nucleus, and
the accreted photons are shot away in opposite directions.

Voila. Applause, please. :slight_smile:

john
galaxy model

I’m doing a re-make of
my spinning/precessing discs
animation of CH4.
Here is a thumbnail of it:
users.accesscomm.ca/john/win4.GIF

In order to work, adjoining discs
had to either rotate oppositely, or
precess oppositely.
When I made the above, I chose
to have the inside disc precess oppositely- as
you can see.

But then when I made Benzene, I realized
that it’s much better to have all the
discs precess together and have
adjoining discs simply FACE the other way.
Way simpler!!
users.accesscomm.ca/john/BenzeneA.GIF

So now I’m re-doing CH4, and it’s turning
out very cool, indeed. It will be a little wait,
because I’m doing every 5.625 degrees, but
I’m already at 78.75, so it depends how
single-minded I get on it. It’s cool, and you
can really see how diamond structure would
work. Give me a couple of weeks.

john
galaxy model

I have finished all 64 frames of
the new animation. What is left is the
non-moving embellishments- like
the orbits.
I just finished tracing out two
corresponding pathways and found-!!
they appear identical to the previous
animation when
neighbours precessed oppositely
wtf?? Does it make no difference?
This is what the joined orbits looked like
last time:
users.accesscomm.ca/bluepath.GIF

john

Sorry. forgot my own name. :slight_smile:
That should be
users.accesscomm.ca/john/bluepath.GIF
The above is from when adjacent discs start
with same rotation/opposite precession.
I will post two GIFs presently that are from
the present animation when adjacent discs
start with opposite rotation/same precession.
It appears to be the same pathway.

john

OK
I combined this into one GIF showing
the shared orbit with and without
the redundant inner loops.
I will use four of these orbits to
house the eight electrons of CH4.
users.accesscomm.ca/john/bluepath2.GIF

john