Premise for Wormholes

The premise for wormholes in physics derives from the 3d10 shell of the
third row of the periodic table. The 3d10 shell is a filled shell of 8
electrons which spin perpendicular to the line which passes through the
nucleus. The other two electrons spin along the line which passes through
the nucleus and mark the two wormholes which go from the 3d10 shell to the
2p6 shell. Argon does not have a 2s shell, the 2s shell migrates to the 1s
shell to form what I call the 1x4 shell. Argon is a 1x4,2p6,3x8 and Krypton
is a 1x4,2p6,3x8,3d10,4x8 where two wormholes go from the 3d10 shell to the
2p6 shell. Wormholes in nature have physical limitations, Physics is
barking up the wrong tree by making them into something that can be
incorporated into time-space as a part of theoretical physics.

--
Science, lacking initiative, must relinquish claim to what is science. I,
due to forces beyond my control, must advance the cause of science. Me TAKE
science, you KEEP technology.

Dear Kevin B. Murphy:

"Kevin B. Murphy" wrote in message
...
The premise for wormholes in physics derives from
the 3d10 shell of the third row of the periodic table.

Nope. Orbitals overlap, no wormhole required.

David A. Smith

Kevin B. Murphy wrote:
The premise for wormholes in physics derives from the 3d10 shell of the
third row of the periodic table. The 3d10 shell is a filled shell of 8
electrons which spin perpendicular to the line which passes through the
nucleus.

Electrons to not spin, but let us move on.

The other two electrons spin along the line which passes through
the nucleus and mark the two wormholes which go from the 3d10 shell to the
2p6 shell.

Uh oh... magical thinking.

On 28-Sep-2008, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" wrote:

Dear Kevin B. Murphy:

"Kevin B. Murphy" wrote in message
...
The premise for wormholes in physics derives from
the 3d10 shell of the third row of the periodic table.

Nope. Orbitals overlap, no wormhole required.

David A. Smith

Well, alright, let the games begin. Well, first of all, if I can take my
model and it fits all the way through to the f-shell then it's not so simple
as to say that orbitals overlap without giving me some reason for believing
you. My model takes what is obvious from the periodic table, namely, that 8
electrons fill a shell, finds a reason for why 8 electrons fill a shell and
builds a model around those reasons. Orbitals never overlap. The
assumption that I'm making that you are neglecting to consider in your model
is that electrons can spin in either of two orientations. They can spin
along the line that passes through the nucleus or they can spin along the
line that is perpendicular to that line. A wormhole is required if one
shell wormholes to another shell when there is a third shell between them.
The only question in my mind is what are the physical limitations on
wormholes. I stopped at Krypton because it has wormholes in the most basic
sense. Tell me please, what is an orbital? Electrons transfer spin energy
to other electrons within the shell they occupy. It would be ridiculous to
believe that every electron in an atom is completely independant of the
other electrons. The most novel thing that I'm even suggesting is that s
shell electrons migrate to adjacent shells.

--
Science, lacking initiative, must relinquish claim to what is science. I,
due to forces beyond my control, must advance the cause of science. Me TAKE
science, you KEEP technology.

On 28-Sep-2008, John J wrote:

Kevin B. Murphy wrote:
The premise for wormholes in physics derives from the 3d10 shell of the
third row of the periodic table. The 3d10 shell is a filled shell of 8
electrons which spin perpendicular to the line which passes through the
nucleus.

Electrons to not spin, but let us move on.

The other two electrons spin along the line which passes through
the nucleus and mark the two wormholes which go from the 3d10 shell to
the
2p6 shell.

Uh oh... magical thinking.

Magical thinking? I didn't invent wormholes. I'm just curious to know
where they came from. Besides, didn't you know that majic is real? Majic
is a means to achieve compliance.

--
Science, lacking initiative, must relinquish claim to what is science. I,
due to forces beyond my control, must advance the cause of science. Me TAKE
science, you KEEP technology.

"Kevin B. Murphy" wrote in message
...

On 28-Sep-2008, John J wrote:

Kevin B. Murphy wrote:
The premise for wormholes in physics derives from the 3d10 shell of the
third row of the periodic table. The 3d10 shell is a filled shell of 8
electrons which spin perpendicular to the line which passes through the
nucleus.

Electrons to not spin, but let us move on.

The other two electrons spin along the line which passes through
the nucleus and mark the two wormholes which go from the 3d10 shell to
the
2p6 shell.

Uh oh... magical thinking.

Magical thinking? I didn't invent wormholes. I'm just curious to know
where they came from.

Sci-fi. Some crank with a wilder imagination than yours.



Besides, didn't you know that majic is real? Majic
is a means to achieve compliance.

--
Science, lacking initiative, must relinquish claim to what is science. I,
due to forces beyond my control, must advance the cause of science. Me
TAKE
science, you KEEP technology.

On 1-Oct-2008, "Androcles" wrote:

"Kevin B. Murphy" wrote in message
...

On 28-Sep-2008, John J wrote:

Kevin B. Murphy wrote:
The premise for wormholes in physics derives from the 3d10 shell of
the
third row of the periodic table. The 3d10 shell is a filled shell of
8
electrons which spin perpendicular to the line which passes through
the
nucleus.

Electrons to not spin, but let us move on.

The other two electrons spin along the line which passes through
the nucleus and mark the two wormholes which go from the 3d10 shell
to
the
2p6 shell.

Uh oh... magical thinking.

Magical thinking? I didn't invent wormholes. I'm just curious to know
where they came from.

Sci-fi. Some crank with a wilder imagination than yours.

Hmm... Maybe... but that would depend on how the physical characteristics of
wormholes are defined. You could be wrong if it is said that wormholes were
supercoherant light.

--
Science, lacking initiative, must relinquish claim to what is science. I,
due to forces beyond my control, must advance the cause of science. Me TAKE
science, you KEEP technology.

"Kevin B. Murphy" wrote in message
...

On 1-Oct-2008, "Androcles" wrote:

"Kevin B. Murphy" wrote in message
...

On 28-Sep-2008, John J wrote:

Kevin B. Murphy wrote:
The premise for wormholes in physics derives from the 3d10 shell of
the
third row of the periodic table. The 3d10 shell is a filled shell
of
8
electrons which spin perpendicular to the line which passes through
the
nucleus.

Electrons to not spin, but let us move on.

The other two electrons spin along the line which passes through
the nucleus and mark the two wormholes which go from the 3d10 shell
to
the
2p6 shell.

Uh oh... magical thinking.

Magical thinking? I didn't invent wormholes. I'm just curious to know
where they came from.

Sci-fi. Some crank with a wilder imagination than yours.

Hmm... Maybe... but that would depend on how the physical characteristics
of
wormholes are defined. You could be wrong if it is said that wormholes
were
supercoherant light.

Hmm... Maybe... You could be wrong if it is said you can't spell 'coherent'
....
and you can't so you are.

On 4-Oct-2008, "Androcles" wrote:

Hmm... Maybe... You could be wrong if it is said you can't spell
'coherent'
...
and you can't so you are.

Go **** yourself.

--
Science, lacking initiative, must relinquish claim to what is science. I,
due to forces beyond my control, must advance the cause of science. Me TAKE
science, you KEEP technology.

"Kevin B. Murphy" wrote in message
...

On 4-Oct-2008, "Androcles" wrote:

Hmm... Maybe... You could be wrong if it is said you can't spell
'coherent'
...
and you can't so you are.

Go **** yourself.


**** you too, ignorant ****.
*plonk*