The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Chapt16.1 Ring in 3rd layer of Caltech's mapping, a Projective
Geometry proof #1217 New Physics #1337 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Replies: 5   Last Post: Feb 11, 2013 3:55 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 18,572
Registered: 3/31/08
Chapt16.1 Ring in 3rd layer of Caltech's mapping, a Projective
Geometry proof #1217 New Physics #1337 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Posted: Feb 11, 2013 1:56 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Chapt16.1 Ring in galactic mapping in 3rd layer of Caltech's mapping
suggests the electron lobe of a Plutonium Atom Totality

Now as promised, I am going to stop the writing of New Physics before
or when page 1300 is reached
and then proceed with only the Atom Totality text. So in this
textbook, there are two texts, one of New Physics and one of the Atom

But before I stop New Physics, a brilliant and cool idea struck me,
and I am not willing to wait to the end of New Physics to discuss this
idea of the Atom Totality. So I decided to give a brief description
rather than wait weeks or months to say this.

In the Atom Totality text, I talk long on the mappings of galaxies,
because if we live in a Plutonium Atom Totality, the distribution of
galaxies would have to conform to the dots in the dot cloud of the
plutonium atom.

Astronomers are mapping the galaxies and here is three projects of

One of those projects, I want to focus in carefully upon in detail.
This mapping-- ring in 3rd layer of Caltech's

--- quoting ---

The third layer (0.01 < z < 0.02) is dominated by the P-P
(left side of image) and the P-I supercluster extending up into the
ZoA terminating as the Great Attractor region (notably Abell 3627)
disappears behind a wall of Milky Way stars. An intriguing "ring" or
chain of galaxies seems to circle/extend from the northern to the
southern Galactic hemisphere (see also Figure 1). It is unknown
whether this ring-like structure is physically associated with the
cosmic web or an artifact of projection.

--- end quoting ---

Now I want to focus on that ring, because, in this textbook, we have
found out that Doppler shift of light is a fiction and that light
cannot be Doppler shifted due to Special Relativity.

So when we hear reports of Doppler redshift, what we are witness to is
a diffraction of light due to the curvature of Space. If Space itself
is bent like a lobe in an electron, then light will be reddened.

Now if the lobe is shaped like a cigar or sausage or cylinder and if
Earth were fixed on a point of that cylinder and looking in one
direction along the axis of the cylinder, light would not be shifted
at all but if we look perpendicular to the axis and light coming from
that direction would be immensely redshifted.

So redshift correlates with bent Space more than it correlates with

The discovery I have made, is that in mathematics, if we are under a
bogus view that redshift is proportional to distance and do the
mappings as Jarrett and Juric have so done, that we would end up with
at least one Cosmic Ring, in spite of the error of believing the
redshift is Doppler.

So that, if we were to throw out all Doppler redshifts and take those
redshifts to mean curvature of space rather than distance, what we end
up with are numerous rings, not just one ring.

What I am trying to convey, is that if given a erroneous idea that
Doppler redshift exists and determines distance, whereas the truth is,
there is no Doppler shift and the redshift is due to curvature, not
distance, that there still would be at least one Ring reported in the
mapping of the erroneous Doppler redshift.

So if Juric and Jarrett, used the redshift not as distance but as
curvature, and re-did their mappings, they would find out that the
galaxies form many rings, not just one ring, and that the galaxies are
points on a cylinder, the lobes of an electron of plutonium.

Now I am a mathematician, and I have the suspicion that a Projective
Geometry proof already exists, that essentially says that even if
Jarrett and Juric believe in an erroneous Doppler Redshift as distance
measure, even though they believe in that error, that regardless,
their mapping will turn up at least one Ring. All of that due to pure

Now, if Jarrett and Juric were to dismiss the redshift as Doppler and
to assign the redshift as purely an indicator of the curvature of
space that the light travelled in, then they would gain a mapping
wherein there are numerous Rings, not just the one ring.

Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from search-engine-
bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and
fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as seen here:

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.