It appears you have not yet registered with our community. To register please click here...

Theory of Everything  

  
Go Back   Theory of Everything > Physics > General Physics > Chemistry
Reload this Page 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Register Website Toe Club Your Blog Arcade

Welcome to the Theory of Everything forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#1 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the rough
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,109
Thanks Given: 641
Thanked 97x in 96 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 71
   
4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 11:51 AM

There are over 100 chemical elements (artificial or natural) discovered so far. Most compounds are bonded by sharing electron pairs called covalence bonding. One of the unsolved mysteries of chemistry is why quadruple bonds do not occur naturally or even artificially. Is it because it violates the octet rule of electron numbers in the outermost shells of chemical elements? The element carbon has 4 valence electrons. By the octet rule it needed four more to complete its outer orbitals. However, two carbon atoms could never share 4 pairs of valence electron even though they can share 3 or 2 or 1 valence electrons called respectively as the triple bond, double bond, and the single bond.

On the other hand, if bond lengths are analyzed with a principle of proximity. It can be shown that the 4-bond structure would need the overlap of nuclear wavefunctions of both carbon atoms. This implies that even wavefunctions cannot possibly violate the proximity theorem of all natural structure. The atomic radius of the neutral carbon atom is 77 picometers while the ionic radius of carbon ion is only 15 picometers. There is a difference of 62 picometers for which the overlapping wavefunctions can take place where the electromagnetic force must overcome the strong nuclear force. This is even worst if the neutral atomic radius of hydrogen (37 picometers) is taken into consideration. Alternatively, a quadruple covalent bond would also break the perfect symmetry of volume determinant from its relation to the scalar triple product: A´B×C where A, B, and C are 3 dimensional vectors.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#2 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,201
Thanks Given: 335
Thanked 617x in 591 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 90
   
Smile Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 11:55 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
There are over 100 chemical elements (artificial or natural) discovered so far. Most compounds are bonded by sharing electron pairs called covalence bonding. One of the unsolved mysteries of chemistry is why quadruple bonds do not occur naturally or even artificially. Is it because it violates the octet rule of electron numbers in the outermost shells of chemical elements? The element carbon has 4 valence electrons. By the octet rule it needed four more to complete its outer orbitals. However, two carbon atoms could never share 4 pairs of valence electron even though they can share 3 or 2 or 1 valence electrons called respectively as the triple bond, double bond, and the single bond.

On the other hand, if bond lengths are analyzed with a principle of proximity. It can be shown that the 4-bond structure would need the overlap of nuclear wavefunctions of both carbon atoms. This implies that even wavefunctions cannot possibly violate the proximity theorem of all natural structure. The atomic radius of the neutral carbon atom is 77 picometers while the ionic radius of carbon ion is only 15 picometers. There is a difference of 62 picometers for which the overlapping wavefunctions can take place where the electromagnetic force must overcome the strong nuclear force. This is even worst if the neutral atomic radius of hydrogen (37 picometers) is taken into consideration. Alternatively, a quadruple covalent bond would also break the perfect symmetry of volume determinant from its relation to the scalar triple product: A´B×C where A, B, and C are 3 dimensional vectors.

When we get to Z are we then on fusions highway?


regards michael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#3 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the rough
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,109
Thanks Given: 641
Thanked 97x in 96 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 71
   
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 11:59 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
When we get to Z are we then on fusions highway
Actually, back to A on Moebius highway.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#4 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,201
Thanks Given: 335
Thanked 617x in 591 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 90
   
Smile Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 12:02 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
Actually, back to A on Moebius highway.

Yes we are getting tangible within the intangible?



regards michael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mkirkpatrick For This Useful Post:
AntonioLao (02-11-2008)
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#5 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the rough
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,109
Thanks Given: 641
Thanked 97x in 96 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 71
   
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 12:18 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
getting tangible within the intangible
Matter can only exist through the 8-fold way as in the octet rule of quantum mechanics and Eastern Mystecism and that of absolute acceleration in Hadamard matrices. Anything more or less is just vacuum of energy squared.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#6 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,201
Thanks Given: 335
Thanked 617x in 591 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 90
   
Smile Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 12:20 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
Matter can only exist through the 8-fold way as in the octet rule of quantum mechanics and Eastern Mystecism and that of absolute acceleration in Hadamard matrices. Anything more or less is just vacuum of energy squared.

Then what is the (matter) in consciousness?



regards michael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#7 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the rough
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,109
Thanks Given: 641
Thanked 97x in 96 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 71
   
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 12:30 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
Then what is the (matter) in consciousness
The matter that we know of is derived from the 8th root of consciousness while its 4th root is negative or antimatter.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#8 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,201
Thanks Given: 335
Thanked 617x in 591 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 90
   
Smile Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 12:35 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
The matter that we know of is derived from the 8th root of consciousness while its 4th root is negative or antimatter.

Thank you Antonio,I never knew that!The higher the number the purer the consciousness?




regards michael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#9 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the roughAntonioLao is a jewel in the rough
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,109
Thanks Given: 641
Thanked 97x in 96 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 71
   
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 12:41 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
I never knew that
Just discovered it this morning in the bus on the way here at the public library. But I can only prove by using complex imaginary numbers.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes
Old
  (#10 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,201
Thanks Given: 335
Thanked 617x in 591 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 90
   
Smile Re: 4 no 3-2-1 yes - 02-11-2008, 12:45 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
Just discovered it this morning in the bus on the way here at the public library. But I can only prove by using complex imaginary numbers.

I was on the bus earler today,however all that happened to me was to be accosted for
money to buy beer!




regards mchael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes