On the surface* of earth we have fission and fusion as a means of
atomic nuclei modification. We split the atomic nucleus or join two or
more atomic nuclei. We understand this process in terms of
Object-Space. Particle absorption or emission, and a chain reaction at
suitable pressure and temperature.

We know that the optimal arrangement for electromagnetic fields is
transverse. The transverse arrangement is efficient. Iron has a
transverse crystal structure. This structure is a result of an
external atomic aggregate field alignment with an internal atomic
structure. This dual transverse atomic alignment in iron enables its
magnetic property**.

I say that under sufficient pressure (such as believed to exist in
star forming galactic clouds) that results from the atomic attraction
between atoms, and mechanically*** sums to the center of the galactic
core aggregate, the internal atomic field structure of the core atoms,
align in the most efficient manner to preserve atomic integrity. As
the pressure increases, the internal atomic forces acquire a
transverse alignment and the atoms arrange externally to maximize the
strength of that alignment. The efficient, transversely aligned
internal field of
each atom, extends beyond its atomic boundary. As the pressure
continues the atomic generated fields external to the atomic
boundaries join. We have a constructive electromagnetic fusion where
multiple atoms fuse into one. This star formation principle eliminates
black holes and extends Newton's third law properly. No action at a
distance.

The cores of stars are baby**** super atoms. In their formation the
constructive fusion maximizes the efficient use of the galactic core
space and a collapse occurs. The change of state into a super atom is
the electromagnetic response to super mechanical pressure. This
process may occur in layers or shells with maximum effect at the
galactic core. A stable super atom has constructively fused
electromagnetically in a transverse manner. Residual evidence of the
layer construction process may be found in sunspots. Lines of
electromagnetic force emanate from the poles of the collapsed core.
These extend a distance sufficient to aid, and or, interfere with the
construction of the terrestrial planets. The larger gaseous planets
may have formed from the less dense and lighter elements of the
galactic cloud, largely on their own. The asteroids did not equally
benefit from the sun's electric arcs and are attracted to the sun in a
manner similar to the way the earth attracts our man made satelites.

* The volume of matter surrounding the core. ** Recently we have
created plastic magnets by aligning what we call the atomic spin of
each atom throughout the structure of the aggregate. This alignment
may be thought to generate magnetic lines of force. *** The
reader may conceptually (though incorrectly) think of this force in
terms of gravity. **** A super atom was first proposed by LeMaitre as
the source of the Big Bang. My super atom is miniscule in comparison.

The repuglicans wasted some 4 years worrying about Bill Clinton's
penis. What made you think they could run the country?

"johnlawrencereed" wrote in message
om...
On the surface* of earth we have fission and fusion as a means of
atomic nuclei modification. We split the atomic nucleus or join two or
more atomic nuclei. We understand this process in terms of
Object-Space.

We understand the process in terms of Quantum Field Theory (QFT).

Rest of unintelligible gibberish such as stars being super atoms mercifully
snipped.

Bill

Your posting reveals that you're just jerking yourself
around based on terminology.

John Anderson

johnlawrencereed wrote:

On the surface* of earth we have fission and fusion as a means of
atomic nuclei modification. We split the atomic nucleus or join two or
more atomic nuclei. We understand this process in terms of
Object-Space. Particle absorption or emission, and a chain reaction at
suitable pressure and temperature.

We know that the optimal arrangement for electromagnetic fields is
transverse. The transverse arrangement is efficient. Iron has a
transverse crystal structure. This structure is a result of an
external atomic aggregate field alignment with an internal atomic
structure. This dual transverse atomic alignment in iron enables its
magnetic property**.

I say that under sufficient pressure (such as believed to exist in
star forming galactic clouds) that results from the atomic attraction
between atoms, and mechanically*** sums to the center of the galactic
core aggregate, the internal atomic field structure of the core atoms,
align in the most efficient manner to preserve atomic integrity. As
the pressure increases, the internal atomic forces acquire a
transverse alignment and the atoms arrange externally to maximize the
strength of that alignment. The efficient, transversely aligned
internal field of
each atom, extends beyond its atomic boundary. As the pressure
continues the atomic generated fields external to the atomic
boundaries join. We have a constructive electromagnetic fusion where
multiple atoms fuse into one. This star formation principle eliminates
black holes and extends Newton's third law properly. No action at a
distance.

The cores of stars are baby**** super atoms. In their formation the
constructive fusion maximizes the efficient use of the galactic core
space and a collapse occurs. The change of state into a super atom is
the electromagnetic response to super mechanical pressure. This
process may occur in layers or shells with maximum effect at the
galactic core. A stable super atom has constructively fused
electromagnetically in a transverse manner. Residual evidence of the
layer construction process may be found in sunspots. Lines of
electromagnetic force emanate from the poles of the collapsed core.
These extend a distance sufficient to aid, and or, interfere with the
construction of the terrestrial planets. The larger gaseous planets
may have formed from the less dense and lighter elements of the
galactic cloud, largely on their own. The asteroids did not equally
benefit from the sun's electric arcs and are attracted to the sun in a
manner similar to the way the earth attracts our man made satelites.

* The volume of matter surrounding the core. ** Recently we have
created plastic magnets by aligning what we call the atomic spin of
each atom throughout the structure of the aggregate. This alignment
may be thought to generate magnetic lines of force. *** The
reader may conceptually (though incorrectly) think of this force in
terms of gravity. **** A super atom was first proposed by LeMaitre as
the source of the Big Bang. My super atom is miniscule in comparison.

The repuglicans wasted some 4 years worrying about Bill Clinton's
penis. What made you think they could run the country?

wrote in message ...
Your posting reveals that you're just jerking yourself
around based on terminology.

John Anderson

Hello John Anderson:

Glad to see you're still around. Jim Carr said it so much better
several years ago. He suggested I post on alt.sci.cunninglinguists.
Needless to say I prefer the cunninglinguists to the jerking myself
around.

I post them as I see them John. No hand waving. Have a good time.
jr
snip the baggage here
The repuglicans wasted some 4 years worrying about Bill Clinton's
penis. What made you think they could run the country?

"Bill Hobba" wrote in message ...
"johnlawrencereed" wrote in message
om...
On the surface* of earth we have fission and fusion as a means of
atomic nuclei modification. We split the atomic nucleus or join two or
more atomic nuclei. We understand this process in terms of
Object-Space.

We understand the process in terms of Quantum Field Theory (QFT).

Rest of unintelligible gibberish such as stars being super atoms mercifully
snipped.

Bill

Ah my man Bill Hobba:

And if QFT is not an Object-Space construct, what is? I appreciate
your incredulity though Bill. It is the same incredulity that I
experienced long ago with space-time continuums and blackholes etc etc
ad infinitum, that set me on my quest in the first place. I take it
that you, along with the great majority today, find blackholes and
curved space etc etc quite reasonable. Stars being super atoms seems
much more sensible to me than stars being blackholes... esp since this
bizarre phenomena rests on our "feel" force. Which is completely
centrist.

I do resent the false "unintelligible gibberish" cliche. You will
never find my posts unclear nor will you witness any hand waving. Have
a good time.

jr

"johnlawrencereed" wrote in message
om...
"Bill Hobba" wrote in message
...
"johnlawrencereed" wrote in message
om...
On the surface* of earth we have fission and fusion as a means of
atomic nuclei modification. We split the atomic nucleus or join two or
more atomic nuclei. We understand this process in terms of
Object-Space.

We understand the process in terms of Quantum Field Theory (QFT).

Rest of unintelligible gibberish such as stars being super atoms
mercifully
snipped.

Bill

Ah my man Bill Hobba:

And if QFT is not an Object-Space construct, what is?

It would be appreciated if you could explain what you mean by 'object-space
construict'; preferably detailing experiments that can distinguish between
the concept not being true and it being true. If you can not do that then
you may have to face up to the idea it is philosophical mumbo jumbo. But
that is OK, I am a Platonist and believe in stuff that is basically
philosophical mumbo jumbo - I just to not confuse it with science.

I appreciate
your incredulity though Bill. It is the same incredulity that I
experienced long ago with space-time continuums and blackholes etc etc
ad infinitum, that set me on my quest in the first place. I take it
that you, along with the great majority today, find blackholes and
curved space etc etc quite reasonable.

That depends on what one means by 'reasonable'. Do I find GR a very
plausable theory that has experimental support? Sure. Am I concerned it
has singularities, we do not have a QM theory valid to all energies, and
observation requires a small cosmological constant but QFT indicates it
should be much larger - in short do I believe it has problems - sure. But
even classical EM had problems eg a point particle had a infinite field at
the particle.

Stars being super atoms seems
much more sensible to me than stars being blackholes... esp since this
bizarre phenomena rests on our "feel" force. Which is completely
centrist.

You are using language is non standard ways - it might be a good idea to
define what you mean by 'super atom'. If you mean it behaves like an atom
then you are wrong - in an atom the laws of QM dominate - however a star is
a classical object.


I do resent the false "unintelligible gibberish" cliche. You will
never find my posts unclear nor will you witness any hand waving.


Yes right - language like 'Object-Space construct' and 'super atom' is
completely standard with a perfectly clear meaning.

Bill

Have
a good time.

jr

I think that if you want to discuss physics here that you
should stop inventing your own terminology unless you
are really willing to explain it instead of just saying
that everyone else ought to know what you're talking about.

John Anderson

I'm not trying to discuss physics. I am laying a foundation in takes
that attempt to communicate an entire panorama, that fits into the
present physics paradigm. It turns out that the internet is the only
place where any of my work has survived. As far as terminology goes, I
am basically illiterate to the mental development process that
accompanies the present paradigm. Though quite knowledgeable of its
history. I did not continue the math beyond the calculus and matrix
analysis. Along with a host of other pieces of intellectual bull**** I
was told that I had to understand the math, to understand physical
reality.

Like the mathematical savant or a new age counterpart of Ptolemy, were
the only persons equipped to comprehend the universe. And what a
universe it was... riddled with more fantasy creations to keep it
afloat than any law should allow.
Spending billions to find a smithereen that fits into the stoopid
object=space paradigm of smithereens. And claiming that Heisenberg's
adjustment to our perceptive and thinking ability, is a property of
the universe itself, and not a property of our own limited abilities,
is so completely moronic its beyond my comprehension to fathom its
depth.

We are on different tracks. I am trying to bridge the difference. If I
live long enough I will. Meanwhile instead of saying I'm not allowed
in the club because my first language is different from yours, just
put my name in killfile status and pretend I don't exist. I am trying
to communicate ideas. There are very few Michael Faradays. The world
does not need another mathematician. I will gear my next post on an
even lower easily accessed reference point for a possible
comprehension to occur.

I do not expect anyone to understand terminology that is used without
reference to some structure. I appreciate being told where I am
breaking down. But keep the insults to yourself. While ya'll were all
sitting back comfortable in your mathematical world of
incomprehensible but predictable fantasies, I've been out here
wrestling with it to make some conceptual sense.

johnreed