Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Page 1 of 4 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Thu Nov 27, 2014 11:45 pm

This topic will have various elements and molecules in MM's papers.
---------

Helium
Atomic Number: 2

241b. Deuterium and Tritium
http://milesmathis.com/deut.pdf
243. Helium4 a Boson? No.
http://milesmathis.com/helboson.pdf
244a. WHY IS ANTI-HELIUM4 SO HARD TO CREATE?
http://milesmathis.com/antih.pdf



Helium4


Helium-Beryllium outlines



115. Dielectric Polarization

http://milesmathis.com/dielec.pdf



Blue disks are alphas (Helium nuclei) and black disks are protons. Green circles are neutrons. Each alpha also contains two neutrons, but since they are completely bound they aren't as important to my diagrams. My diagrams were created mainly to show the charge channels through the nucleus, which is why I have diagrammed the important bodies as disks. Charge emission is at the equator or edge of each disk, so you can follow the channels very easily. The main charge channels of the nucleus come in at the poles and out at the nuclear equator. So in this case the charge is understood to be coming in from the north and south and exiting through the four black disks (which I call the carousel level—it spins like a carousel).

Already you can see that this creates a field complexity far beyond anything the mainstream has been able to diagram. But there is more. I have shown that the charge field itself is also “polar.” Charge is composed of photons, and these photons can be separated into left spinners and right spinners (which I also call antiphotons). Due to field potentials, the photons come in the south pole of the nucleus and the antiphotons come in the north pole. Most of both then exit through the carousel level. This gives us another degree of freedom, explaining things like beta decay with straight mechanics.

So while the mainstream diagram only gives you one “polarity” (and has to manufacture vectors to do it), I have given you three. The nucleus is polar, in that it has a spin axis from north to south. It has that polarity before any E-field is applied, and in fact it can create its own E-field from any charge field whatsoever. But the nucleus is also quadrilateral, in that another polarity is created by the charge channels. Since charge normally comes in N or S, but exits E/W in a circle, we have a second orthogonal “polarity.” We then have a third polarity caused by the charge field. Since charge is already polar before it hits the nucleus, the field created by charge channeling is what I call bi-polar. It is a polar field being recycled by a polar body, so it is twice polar. And once we include the E/W circular emission, we have a sort of tri-polar field, or a field with three polar degrees of freedom. All that is mechanical, and I can and have drawn you a picture to explain it.

---------

242a. Reaction with the Noble Gasses
http://milesmathis.com/xeptf6.pdf

We also have to consider that Hydrogen and Helium have very unfocused charge channels. They are emitting charge in a full circle, basically, so the charge stream is not linear. Larger elements create channels that could be called more or less linear. They are more focused. This is one of the first things that stands in the way of easy alchemy. If Hydrogen and Helium had linear charge channels, alchemy would indeed be quite simple, as you put it.

“OK, so when Hydrogen bonds with something like Chlorine, why doesn't this just create Argon?” Because the structure of the nucleus is completely different, and the structure of the charge channels is completely different. Yes, they both have an atomic number of 18, but an element is more than an atomic number. An element is a certain nuclear structure.

“But Hydrogen can bond to Fluorine, and Fluorine can bond to Platinum, so the streams can't be that different.” Another good point, but again there is an answer. One Fluorine won't bond to one Platinum, and that is one reason why (another reason is that it creates an unbalanced molecule). It takes six Fluorines to match the charge stream of Platinum, and one just gets bounced out. Yes, I am simplifying these answers because I want to move on, but I want to suggest that all such questions have mechanical answers. We just have to look for the answers in the charge channels, not in the electron orbitals.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:23 pm; edited 8 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Thu Nov 27, 2014 11:58 pm

-------
Lithium
Atomic Number: 3

Beryllium
Atomic Number: 4


229. HOW TO BUILD A NUCLEUS without a Strong Force
http://milesmathis.com/stack.html



We can apply the same analysis to lithium. We have three protons and four neutrons. We stack our three disks, and need four posts to separate them.

But now we arrive at the beryllium nucleus. In this case we have four protons and five neutrons. Why that number? Why is the number 9 stable when the numbers 8 and 10 are not? If we use the same diagram as we used for helium and lithium, we would expect to need 6 neutrons to separate 4 protons, which would give us 10. Obviously, the nucleus has already discovered a more efficient method than our dual posts. Beryllium 10, with 6 neutrons, is actually very stable, with a half life of over a million years, so nature does use the six post model here. But the five post model is also effective, so given the chance, nature will prefer it. Beryllium can stack with only five posts due to the fact that the lithium model is already so stable. If we place the neutrons in lithium like this,

then we have such a solid spinning structure that the top level can be balanced by only one neutron, placed in the middle. The disk below cannot turn, so the central neutron must resist only the upper disk. Remember that the neutron is not a narrow pillar. It has a z-spin radius equal to that of the proton, so it is quite capable of providing stability in this way. If we let it spin in the same plane as the protons, this is even more obvious.

You will say, “Well, if we can balance disks so easily, why did we not let one neutron balance the third proton in lithium? Weren't the first two disks almost as stable?” Yes, they were, and we can. Lithium 6 is a stable isotope, existing abundantly in the universe. The reason it isn't as common as lithium 7 is probably due to the fact that it is burned more easily in stars. It is slightly easier to break that one post than the two posts of lithium 7, so stars will burn lithium 6 preferentially.

The same analysis applies to helium 3. Helium 3 is stable, but easier to burn than helium 4.

----------
230. HOW THE ELEMENTS ARE BUILT
http://milesmathis.com/nuclear.pdf


Since I have already shown the diagrams for Lithium and Beryllium in a previous paper, let us move on to the next noble gas above Helium, which is Neon. I will show that Neon must be five alpha particles huddling in a very stable configuration. What configuration is that? Actually, Neon can (or could) find great stability in one of two shapes, both of which have ten neutrons. To diagram this, I will simplify the alpha particle into a single disk.

Again, each grey disk is an alpha particle. To create these diagrams, I simply lined up hole with edge, or plus to minus. The alpha particles are emitting on the edges of the disks, so those are field positives. The alpha particles are sucking in photons top and bottom center, so those are field negatives. We put them together because the field potentials would naturally tend to put them together.

Helium-Beryllium outlines

....
This means that the whole idea of “filling” levels is wrongheaded. Elements don't fill electron levels by any rules, since there are no electron levels. The levels are in the nucleus and are caused by protons. Any element “fills” itself with electrons only to match open holes or charge minima in the outer levels of the nucleus. This by itself destroys the current theory and math.

How was this error made? you may ask. It was made because historically nuclear physicists worked with the smallest elements first, as you would expect. They made their first rules to fit Hydrogen, then tweaked the rules as they hit Helium and Lithium and so on. They understood pretty early on that the noble gases were special, and were a clue, but they didn't read the clue right. They didn't understand that the noble gases were giving them a template—a template that was like a list of rules for building all the elements above Neon. Instead of using the noble gases as their bases, they tried to use Hydrogen as their base, rigging the math to Hydrogen.

The principle quantum numbers were invented to explain Hydrogen, which is the first reason they are faulty. The second reason is that particle physicists concentrated on the electron instead of the nucleus. The electron was discovered long before the nucleus, and most of the study of the quantum level started with electromagnetic theory, back in the 19thcentury. This is why quantum mechanics was built around the electron rather than the nucleus. This is why the quantum numbers are still given to the electrons, and why the nucleus is mostly ignored. The nucleus is also fairly opaque to experiments, or was for a long time, so no one had any real need to diagram it in the early years. Early on, the Periodic Table was tied to electron orbitals, and the nucleus receded even further into the background. After the nucleus was split, other questions came to the fore, questions about mesons and quarks and binding energies and so on. By that time, no one was interested in basic quantum mechanics, because they thought it had already been done. They had already given the pseudo-mechanics to the electrons. They thought it was perfect, and so they moved on.

Yes, the nucleus was first split in 1932—which is very early—but that was a splitting of Lithium, which didn't tell them much. It told them that Lithium was made from Helium nuclei, which might have led them where I just went, but they didn't go there. Cockcroft and Walton were more interested in measuring binding energies than in rebuilding Lithium with a diagram. And they came to the wrong conclusion even about binding energies, since they took the energy differences as a measure of particle energies, rather than as a measure of the charge field involved. In other words, since they didn't know about the charge field or the unified field, they thought the only things involved in this energy equation were the larger particles they were tracking. That has turned out to be false.

To be more specific, Cockcroft and Walton found that the outgoing Helium nuclei had more kinetic energy than the incoming proton and Lithium atom. This brings us back to the first problem of this paper. They interpreted this to mean that the binding energy was being turned into kinetic energy. This is where the energy of fission comes from. Current theory makes a hash of this in its explanations, but it is easy to understand with my mechanics. Elements have to be built in stars or cores, and great forces (pressures or temperatures) have to be applied to fuse them. These forces have to be used, because charge field pressure normally prevents baryons from achieving structures. There are a lot of photons flying around everywhere, and they simply get in the way when you start squeezing too much. Only stars and cores can provide the forces necessary to overcome the charge field. And without the charge field, these elements would just dissolve back into protons once they were released from the star, because there would be no pressure to prevent them from doing so. The charge field is both the initial pressure and the subsequent glue, and neither the resistance nor the bond could be explained without the charge field.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:32 pm; edited 4 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 12:35 am

Boron
Atomic Number: 5


93c.  P-N Junctions without Holes

http://milesmathis.com/dope.pdf




It helps if we apply that diagram to some real elements, so that you understand what is going on here. The most common semiconductor is Silicon, of course, and it is often P-doped with Boron and N-doped with Phosphorus. Silicon is element number 14, while Boron is 5 and Phosphorus is 15. Doping just means those elements are added to Silicon to make it more conductive. But since the conductivity of the two doped areas are still different, a voltage is created across the junction. This built-in voltage can be later augmented by attaching the whole diode to a battery of some sort.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:06 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 12:39 am

Carbon
Atomic Number: 6


240d. The Great Methane Stink
http://milesmathis.com/meth.pdf




Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:08 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 12:42 am

Nitrogen
Atomic Number: 7

139.  The Unified Field explains the Atmosphere including the non-layering of O and N
http://milesmathis.com/atmo2.pdf



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:09 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 12:47 am

Oxygen
Atomic Number: 8


216. The Charge Profile of Sr2CuO3
http://milesmathis.com/orbiton.pdf



243. Helium4 a Boson? No.

http://milesmathis.com/helboson.pdf






213b. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance
http://milesmathis.com/nmr.pdf



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:10 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 12:55 am

Flourine
Atomic Number: 9

242a. Reaction with the Noble Gasses
http://milesmathis.com/xeptf6.pdf



 241b. Deuterium and Tritium
http://milesmathis.com/deut.pdf

In previous papers, I have shown that we have evidence of larger nuclei doing extraordinary things to smaller nuclei, when the two are brought very close together. This is because the charge channels very close to the nucleus are amazingly dense, and under the right circumstances we have seen star-like strengths from these channels, causing proton and neutron re-arrangement in the outer levels of the nucleus. For example, we saw the four Fluorines re-arranging the charge channels and even the outer protons of Carbon in Carbon TetraFluoride. We saw Platinum with the help of Fluorine forcing an entry into Xenon, and creating a compound with a Noble Gas. And we saw a passing neutron being able to break Uranium into Krypton and Barium. So we know some pretty extraordinary things happen outside of stars.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:11 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 12:58 am

Neon
Atomic Number: 10

 241b. Deuterium and Tritium
http://milesmathis.com/deut.pdf



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:11 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:00 am

Sodium
Atomic Number: 11



240a. Electron Bonding is a myth
http://milesmathis.com/ionic.pdf

But wait, the ionic bond is used to explain the bonding of atoms, not ions. For instance, in the given example of NaCl, it is a Sodium atom that loses an electron to become a Sodium cation. But the Sodium atom is already stable. It doesn't need to release any of its electrons to achieve a stable configuration, because it is already stable. So what causes it to drop an electron in the presence of Chlorine? We aren't told.
This problem becomes even bigger when we ask the same question for Chlorine. Has Chlorine dropped an electron to become an ion? No, we don't want Chlorine dropping electrons, we want Chlorine adding electrons. So in the beginning, Chlorine is just an atom, and as such is stable. Why should it want to borrow an electron from Sodium? We are told it is because Chlorine has an “electron affinity,” but that is just a statement. In fact, Chlorine can't “want” an extra electron, because that would be a stable atom “wanting” to be unstable. That makes no sense.

It is even worse if we ask for an explanation of electron affinity.
The Electron Affinity of an atom or molecule is defined as the amount of energy released when an electron is added to a neutral atom or molecule to form a negative ion.

But that is clearly circular. You can't define an affinity by a release of energy. The release of energy is the result. We want a cause.
As a sort of answer, we are told Ionic bonding will occur only if the overall energy change for the reaction is favourable – when the reaction is exothermic.

The atoms apparently have some desire to release energy. But that isn't an answer, either; it is another diversion. All that tells us is that there is a release of energy during the bond, but that energy could be released in any number of mechanical scenarios. As you will see, it happens in my scenario, which has nothing to do with electrons being shared or borrowed. So it is indication of nothing.
We are told that all elements desire to become noble gases, and that this explains why atoms want to gain or lose electrons. But that is strictly illogical, and we have no evidence for it anyway. It is implied that Chlorine wants another electron to be more like Argon, but if that is true, what it really should want is another proton. Another electron won't make Chlorine into Argon, it will only make
Chlorine an ion, which is unstable. Elements don't want to be ions, which is why ions take on electrons to become atoms. It is ions that want to be atoms, not the reverse. If there is any affinity, it is for having the same number of electrons and protons, as we know. Atoms have no affinity for becoming ions.

Once I remind you of the fact, you can see that we have loads of evidence that atoms do not want to gain or lose electrons. It is ions that want to be atoms, not atoms that want to be ions. And it is positive ions that attract free electrons, as we know, not negative ions or atoms. Once Sodium becomes a cation, it should attract the free electron, not Chlorine. So there is no reason for Sodium to start releasing electrons just to suit theorists. There is no reason for a free electron to move from a cation to a stable atom. But there are lots of reasons for Sodium not to release electrons. This whole theory is upside down from the beginning. Therefore, the bond cannot be caused this way.
Let me say it again: free electrons do not move from cations to stable atoms. That is strictly backwards. 20th century theorists have sold you a contradiction. They give the electron a minus sign and the cation a plus sign and the stable atom no sign, then tell you—as the foundation of a theory— that this free electron moves to the stable atom. If you buy that you will buy anything, and you have.

237b. Salt is not what we thought
http://milesmathis.com/salt.pdf

What no one is admitting is that these experiments are actually far more profound and important than that. This is because the old rules were not rules that should have been trumped by pressure and heat. The new experiments don't just disprove the old rules at high heat. They disprove the old rules, period. The old rules and models disallow these bonds under any conditions. Therefore, the creation of these new molecules disproves the old rules and models.

Why? Because according to electron bonding theories—all of them—allowed bonds are not a function of heat or of pressure. They are a function of orbital structures. Since the orbital structures should not change in kind in high pressure or heat, allowed molecules should not change. Given electron orbitals, high heat or pressure should only compress the orbitals. An orbital compression cannot explain what we are seeing. Even if the orbital shapes were somehow affected, that would still not explain these new molecules. Orbitals would have to be destroyed and many electrons ejected, and we have no evidence of that. In some of these experiments, Sodium is accepting seven Chlorines. To explain that with electron orbital theory, you need to give Sodium a valence of +7. That would create an absolute typhoon of free electrons, and we don't see that. There is no evidence Sodium is being ionized down the level 7, and lots of evidence it isn't.

For instance, I will show below that even with NaCl3, only one new electron is being ionized, not two as would be expected. They have ways to measure these things, but they don't. They don't even try to measure them, because doing so would compromise their facile new theories.
What they should have done while they were creating computer models is to model what was possible under high pressure and heat using the standard model, with current physics and chemistry laws and equations. They didn't do that, because they already knew the answer: nothing should have happened. No bond should have been formed, but especially not a permanent bond. Once the pressure was released, any exotic molecules should have immediately cratered. Which of course means the experiments don't confirm the current physics and chemistry laws and equations—which is what I have been saying for years.



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:15 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:04 am

Magnesium 
Atomic Number: 12

214. Splitting the Electron?
http://milesmathis.com/cu.pdf



Blue disks are double protons (or alphas) and black disks are single protons. In my simplest diagrams I leave the neutrons out of it, as I will do here. Magnesium has only two easy bonding spots top and bottom, and tends to be linear in the simplest bonds. But Copper can bond top or at either of the two carousel openings. In other words, Copper can accept protons at any of the three outer black positions. Since a blue disk can take two protons, those black positions have an open hole. If you have not studied my nuclear diagrams before this, you will have to read my nuclear.pdf paper to understand my simple method of construction.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:16 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:11 am

Aluminum
Atomic Number: 13

214. Splitting the Electron?
http://milesmathis.com/cu.pdf

Only mention of Aluminum?

Likely looks like Magnesium with two single alphas on the 6-7 positions.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:17 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:13 am

Silicon 
Atomic Number: 14

230. HOW THE ELEMENTS ARE BUILT
http://milesmathis.com/nuclear.pdf



93c.  P-N Junctions without Holes
http://milesmathis.com/dope.pdf



This configuration resists building in normal circumstances, because the charge hole top and bottom (in the first configuration) is surrounded by four charge maxima. The alpha particle needs pressure to be pushed into that slot between them. But once it is in there, it is very stable. In fact, that configuration (before we put the top and bottom disks on) is Silicon. Silicon is very reactive, though not as reactive as Carbon. We can see why when we notice those two points out in the breeze. We will again get a carousel spin, but those maxima are now sticking up beyond the others, creating a hook for reaction.



Phosphorus 

Atomic Number: 15

93c. P-N Junctions without Holes
http://milesmathis.com/dope.pdf



It helps if we apply that diagram to some real elements, so that you understand what is going on here. The most common semiconductor is Silicon, of course, and it is often P-doped with Boron and N-doped with Phosphorus. Silicon is element number 14, while Boron is 5 and Phosphorus is 15. Doping just means those elements are added to Silicon to make it more conductive. But since the conductivity of the two doped areas are still different, a voltage is created across the junction. This built-in voltage can be later augmented by attaching the whole diode to a battery of some sort.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:19 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:19 am

Sulfur
Atomic Number: 16

115. Dielectric Polarization
http://milesmathis.com/dielec.pdf



With the Charge Field flows:


238. An Analysis of Meta-cinnabar
http://milesmathis.com/cinn.pdf



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:21 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:24 am

Chlorine
Atomic Number: 17

240a. Electron Bonding is a myth
http://milesmathis.com/ionic.pdf



237b. Salt is not what we thought
http://milesmathis.com/salt.pdf



Under normal circumstances, Sodium and Chlorine bond one-to-one like that, not because of electron orbitals or electronegativity, but because that is what the given charge channels allow. To understand what I mean by that, you need to understand that charge always has a direction. Specifically, in that diagram above, (summed) charge is moving left to right. Each nucleus takes in the most charge at the south pole, so both Na and Cl were channeling left to right even before they met. The diagram above is on its side, you see, so that the south pole of each nucleus is to the left. What this means is that there is no other easy plug in the diagram above. Given a second Cl in the field, for instance, there isn't anywhere for it to bond. Under normal circumstances, we won't see NaCl2, because there is nowhere to put it. You will say, “Sure, just plug the single (north pole) blue disk of Cl into the south pole of Na. The directions all match, according to your theory.” But that doesn't work under normal circumstances, because that puts more charge channeling through Na than it can take. You can channel charge from Na to Cl, but not from Cl to Na. Since Cl is channeling more charge than Na, it won't plug in that way. It would be like trying to plug a hose carrying 2x amount of water into a hose that could contain x amount of water. If you could force the plug, the smaller hose would explode. But what actually happens in that the connection can't even be made. Try it with real hoses and you will see that—without turning off the water—you can't make the connection. The pressure simply won't allow it. That is what is happening here. Any second Cl passing nearby won't be able to make a connection.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:22 am; edited 4 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:26 am

Argon
Atomic Number: 18 (full carousel)

230. HOW THE ELEMENTS ARE BUILT
http://milesmathis.com/nuclear.pdf






Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:23 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:39 am

Potassium
Atomic Number: 19

?



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:06 pm; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:41 am

Calcium
Atomic Number: 20

235. MAGIC NUMBERS in the Periodic Table
http://milesmathis.com/semf.pdf



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:45 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:43 am

Scandium
Atomic Number: 21

233. The LANTHANIDES and breaking madelung rule
http://milesmathis.com/lanthan.pdf



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:45 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:50 am

Titanium 
Atomic Number: 22

240c. Period 6  Why Isn't Hafnium a Noble Gas?
http://milesmathis.com/haf.pdf

?



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:46 am; edited 3 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:54 am

Vanadium
Atomic Number: 23

?



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:08 pm; edited 1 time in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:55 am

Chromium -- Cr6 Wink
Atomic Number: 24

235. MAGIC NUMBERS in the Periodic Table
http://milesmathis.com/semf.pdf



In my theory, the fourth level is represented by the positions of the six black disks here. Since Chromium is the first element in Period 4 to fill them all evenly, Chromium fits one definition of magic number. It certainly fits that definition better than Calcium, which only fills the top and bottom slots.
So why does current theory think Calcium is special? Well, according to the theory of magic numbers, it is because Calcium “completes its shell in the nucleus.” As I pointed out before, this must mean the atomic shells don't match the electron shells, because the number 20 wouldn't be special in electron
orbital theory.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:48 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 2:01 am

Manganese 
Atomic Number: 25

?



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:09 pm; edited 1 time in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 2:02 am

Iron
Atomic Number: 26

240b. PERIOD FOUR of the Periodic Table
http://milesmathis.com/per4.pdf



The other clue to the composition of these nuclei is seen in the high magnetism of Iron, Cobalt, and Nickel, as well as the conductivity of Copper. After several tries, this is my latest attempt at diagramming Iron:

Blue disks are alphas, which contain two protons. Black disks are single protons. Green circles are neutrons. I have drawn the neutrons smaller and as circles only as a convenience—to separate them from the protons at a glance, and to fit them into already crowded diagrams. However, I need to include the neutrons to explain the densities in Period 4, as you will now see.

Current theory thinks Iron has two electrons in an outer s shell for the same reason it thinks Chromium has one. Those two north protons [each blue disk contains two protons] will have the electrons that are ionized first, so they will seem to act like a level all their own as regards ionization. But regarding other characteristics of Iron, my diagram is clearly superior to the current one. We can explain its increased density over the elements below it by the increase in nucleons on the axis. Since those top and bottom alphas are on the axis, they have very little angular momentum. It is the carousel protons, both blue and black here, that have most of the angular momentum. Therefore, putting protons in those top and bottom positions is the next best thing you can do to putting them in the inner positions, as regards density. Although they are relatively far from the nuclear center, they aren't far from the nuclear axis, and in this case that is nearly as good.

Having all those protons on the axis also helps us explain the magnetic qualities of Iron (and other elements built like this). Magnetic strength is now given to domain alignment, but that has never been connected to any real mechanics. Here we can see that magnetic strength has more to do with charge conduction in both directions along the axis. Magnetism is not just a matter of charge strength. Nor is it a matter of charge density, since as we saw with Silver and as we will see with Copper, electrical conduction is better when there is a proton differential from top to bottom (see below), so that we get conduction in one direction only. What we have here is charge going straight through in both directions, or a sort of conduction in both directions (north and south). When that happens, we don't just have a conducted charge—which means the charge is going in one direction, and is capable of strongly carrying current with it. When we have conduction in both directions, we actually have doubly spun or magnetic charge. This charge may be weak in current, because photons are going both directions. But it has an augmented magnetism precisely because the charge and anticharge are being made spin coherent.

What do I mean by that? It sounds esoteric, but it is actually simple. If you have antiphotons going down in a line through the nuclear axis and photons going up in that same line, your conduction may be poor because your photon traffic is going both ways. Your linear streams are canceling one another. But your magnetism will be augmented because—as a matter of spin—a photon going up is the same thing as an antiphoton going down. Photons and antiphotons are only opposite if they are traveling side by side in the same direction. In that case, their spins cancel and the magnetic field goes to zero. But if they are traveling in opposite directions, their spins actually stack, since they are the same. That is what we see here with Iron.

Notice that there are twice as many protons in the axis holes (two) as in the carousel holes (one). This means the carousel holes can't pull charge through as fast as the axis holes are pushing it in. So some of the charge gets pushed straight through the nucleus, coming out the opposite pole. This is what we call conduction. Rather than being recycled through the normal channel from pole to equator, the charge is conducted from pole to pole. Where normal charge recycling creates an orthogonal channel, conduction creates a linear channel. This linear channel can then align atoms and molecules, and the linear channel through many molecules can then drive ions, either via the linear motion of the charge— which is current—or via the spin of the charge—which is magnetism. Since Iron is conducting both ways, it is a better creator of the magnetic field than the electrical field. If the ambient charge field were balanced regarding photons and antiphotons, Iron would be an even worse conductor. As it is, Iron has to rely on charge imbalance in order to conduct at all. In other words, since more photons are coming in the south pole than the north, we don't get a cancellation of current through the axis. Iron can still conduct, though not as well as Copper or Silver.

The fact that Iron has no protons in the interior holes is also important to this equation, since those positions also draw off charge from the axis. If you have protons in those holes, you always have less conduction—both electrical and magnetic. This is why Iron, Cobalt, Nickel, and Copper all must have neutrons only in the axis holes. Any protons there would draw off charge from the axial level, lowering the conduction of both magnetism and current.

Now let us look at those neutrons in the inner holes. Most elements need to close those holes to maintain stability, since a completely open hole allows the ambient charge field to rush through. If the charge field isn't well balanced as a matter of direction, it can rip the nucleus apart from those inner holes. Only the smallest elements can let those holes remain open, and then only in cases where the charge field is very balanced. Since neutrons act as stoppers, one neutron is often enough to close an inner hole, as long as we are dealing with smaller elements and weaker charge channels. Larger elements as a rule have to stopper the inner hole from both sides, since it is open to both sides (unlike other alphas in the architecture). Charge can come through from either side, in which case it can blow a single neutron out from the opposite side. Iron is a bit of a special case here, because an element that is a strong conductor will have a lot of charge passing straight through, as we have seen. That conducted charge acts as a sort of negative pressure, pulling the neutron into the inner hole from the inside. So in elements like Iron, the neutron in an inner hole feels a bit of suction, adding to its stability. This is why one hole is stable with only a single neutron in it. Also notice that the single neutron is on the north side, which is the anticharge side. Because the ambient field is not balanced, the top half of the axial level has less charge to deal with, both internally and externally. For this reason, Iron can get away with this relatively small internal lack of balance. The internal lack of balance matches the external lack of balance, you see.

To see how poor the current answer is, we can look at the mainstream's explanation of Iron, Cobalt, and Nickel, three elements with the highest magnetism. We are told that magnetism is caused by unpaired electrons, but do we find that with these three elements? No. To start with, the mainstream electron configuration of Iron is 2, 8, 14, 2. Since each shell has an even number, there aren't any unpaired electrons. For magnetism to have anything to do with unpaired electrons, we would have to be dealing with ionized iron. But un-ionized iron is magnetic as well, so the answer is misdirection. To explain Iron, Cobalt, and Nickel with unpaired electrons is impossible, since they are right next to eachother on the Periodic Table, being elements 26, 27, and 28. They could not all have an odd number of electrons, could they?


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:52 am; edited 3 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 2:06 am

Cobalt
Atomic Number: 27

240b. PERIOD FOUR of the Periodic Table
http://milesmathis.com/per4.pdf

Nickel
Atomic Number: 28

240b. PERIOD FOUR of the Periodic Table
http://milesmathis.com/per4.pdf



Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:53 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Mathis' Chemistry Graphics

Post by Cr6 on Fri Nov 28, 2014 2:12 am

Copper 
Atomic Number: 29

214. Splitting the Electron?
http://milesmathis.com/cu.pdf

216. The Charge Profile of Sr2CuO3
http://milesmathis.com/orbiton.pdf






Blue disks are double protons (or alphas) and black disks are single protons. In my simplest diagrams I leave the neutrons out of it, as I will do here. Magnesium has only two easy bonding spots top and bottom, and tends to be linear in the simplest bonds. But Copper can bond top or at either of the two carousel openings. In other words, Copper can accept protons at any of the three outer black positions. Since a blue disk can take two protons, those black positions have an open hole. If you have not studied my nuclear diagrams before this, you will have to read my nuclear.pdf paper to understand my simple method of construction.

Now, I ask you to compare my Copper nucleus to the Cu(OH2) diagram from Wiki. It fits right in the middle there, doesn't it? And I didn't draw this Copper model to solve this problem. If you study my models for other elements from my nuclear.pdf paper and other papers, you will see that my diagram of Copper is the result of simple construction rules I laid down there—before I ever began studying this Cu-O problem. Specifically, we fill the noble levels 1 and 2 first, then add the carousel level. Iron completes that level, and Copper is three protons into the fourth level. Notice that the nucleus in period 4 is basically ten protons tall and seven protons wide, there is more potential difference top to bottom than side to side. This will help us solve this problem in a straightforward way. Nothing in my model is determined by math or ad hoc theory. It is determined by logic and mechanics. It is determined by what is necessary to physically channel the charge field through the nucleus.

You will say, “That is charge, but what you are plugging into these positions is protons, not charge.” But all charged particles follow charge. That is what “charged particle” means. Protons, like electrons, are physically pushed by the charge wind. They go where charge pushes them, because charge pushes them. Both their linear motions and spins come straight from charge. Spinning photons cause charged particles to spin, and moving photons cause charged particles to move. If we go back to Argon, without the top and bottom protons, we find charge whistling through the axial level of that nucleus. It also gets partially diverted by pull from the carousel level, and much charge is channeled that way, too. But the main line is axial. So when the ambient charge field passes Argon, it gets channeled first through the axial level. And if free protons are available (as in stars), as well as pressure to force a tight and permanent fit, the protons will follow the pre-existing charge channels and go to the axial level as well. That is how we build Calcium and other period 4 elements from Argon.

This explains the longer axial bonds of Cu-O in a natural way. It isn't that the bonds are longer, it is that the nucleus of Copper is actually taller than it is wide. You will say, “That isn't borne out by the numbers, which are not in a 10 to 7 ratio. According to you, the axial length here should be about 10/7th of 195, which is 279, not 238.” Good point, but easily answerable with straight mechanics. Because the axial level is a stronger charge channel than the carousel level—for the reasons just enumerated—the axial bond will actually be shorter. A stronger channel creates a tighter fit, which is a shorter bond length. We would expect this to also be in a 10 to 7 ratio, for the same reason, but this time the axial number should be 7 and the carousel number should be 10, to represent the shorter axial bond length relative to the longer overall axial length. All we need now to solve is the percentage that goes to each cause of length. Is the length of the nucleus more important or is the length of the bond more important? That is also easy to calculate, since we can take it straight from the diagram. If we let the length of the bonding proton stand for the bond length, then the bond length is just 1/10thof the total axial length. This gives us the simple equation:
[(10/7)(9/10)] – [(7/10)(1/10)] ≈ 1.216
If we multiply that by 195, we get 237. I needed to match 238, so you can see that I have confirmed the data with extremely simple mechanics and math. And I have proved that nuclear mechanics can explain bond differences, with no need for electron degeneracy.


Last edited by Cr6 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:56 am; edited 2 times in total

Cr6
Admin

Posts : 655
Join date : 2014-08-09

View user profile http://milesmathis.the-talk.net

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 4 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum