Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Funny, how I am going to turn-- publishing of books on the
Internet into a book itself and this starting as the preface
page.

First of all, to publish a book, no matter where it is
published has to have something to say that is both
true and important. Most books that fill libraries
can be thrown away as not meeting both of those
requirements. In fact, all fiction books except for
a trifling few should have never been written or
thrown away. Fiction books should be in the comic
book section where someone really has alot of time
to waste.

So far, I have written the 1st edition and compiled
these 41 books:

Anthropology: Stonethrowing
Astronomy: Growing Galaxies
Astronomy: Growing Solar System
Biology: Superdeterminism Replaces Darwin Evolution
Biology: Photon is Perfect-DNA
Biology: Photons Physically Duplicate
Biology: Optimal Strategy of Human Cloning
Biology: Patterns of Extinction
Biology: Extended Genome and Virus Creation
Biology: Better theory for dog species
Ecology: Protecting Earth Ecosystem
Ecology: Energy Efficiency
Ecology: Human Overpopulation
Economics: Lowest Terms
Economics: Optimal Strategy of Stockmarket Play
Geology: Growing Earth
Geology: Motor Vibration Replaces Plate Tectonics
Geology: How Earth got its Water
History: Jesus through Occam's Razor
Logic: Syllogism "All Matter is made up of Atoms"
Logic: Correcting Euclid's Infinitude of Primes Proof"
Logic: Correcting Many and Most Math Proof Flaws
Math: Lowest Terms
Math: AP-adics Primer
Math: Optimal Strategy of Playing Chess
Medicine: Metal Causation Diseases, Autism, Alzheimers, Parkinsons,
Prion, Schizophrenia
Physics: Atom Totality 2nd ed
Physics: Fusion Barrier Principle
Physics: Coulomb Unification
Physics: Gravity is Coulomb Auto-Pilot
Physics: How Superconductivity Really Works
Political Science: MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) Fleet
Political Science: Strategy that Wins all Wars
Political Science: New Form of Government-- World Science Council
Psychology: Brain Locus Theory
Sociology: What Religion Really Is
Sociology: Corrosion of Religion
Sociology: Solving Global Warming
Science of sci.art
Science of sci.music
Science of sci.poetry

I have taken a vacation or break from publishing and compiling
to that of editing the above.

And so far I see a painful hole in my above list which I must correct
come August when I return to the science book publishing on the Internet.

The painful hole in the above is the lack of books on Chemistry. Why is
that? Well I have an easy answer in that chemistry is so close to
physics that it is physics focused on a small segment of physics. I
could have called superconductivity as a chemistry book, but the
solution to superconductivity is a solving of the fact that the
definition of "current" in physics needed a modern modification, so
that is really more broad than is chemistry. So the reason I lack
books on chemistry is because my mind is more focused on big theories
of science and that ends up with more physics than with chemistry. But I
did manage to have some new theories in chemistry which I can write
at least two books on new ideas for chemistry.

But I think that with the Atom Totality theory, and with the cognizance
of the fact that the Schrodinger Equation means so much to Chemistry,
that I think I can improve on the application of the Schrodinger
Equation to Chemistry by applying the ideas of the Atom Totality.

The heart of chemistry is really the Schrodinger Equation, and the
Atom Totality theory would thence have a new perspective of the
application of the Schrodinger Equation for solutions of chemistry. For
example, the photon and electron have "insides" to them which chemistry
up to now never acknowledged.

My book on the biology that a photon has perfect-DNA is perhaps more
chemistry than it is biology.

I remember a huge mistake made by most physicists when asked the
question of how many Coulomb Interactions are involved in holding
together a neon atom and most physicists and chemists would say
something like 190, whereas in truth it is a very large number.
So most physicists and chemists are oblivious in mind with the
truth about "insides of atoms" or insides of photon or electron.

Now one thing the above editing has made beneficial for me is the
title naming. I used to have these long unwieldy titles that probably
turned off many students upon seeing. But now I have a efficient way
of titling. Simply the area of science such as physics or geology
or biology and then a few words as to the subject.

Let me mention though the prime essential tool in Internet Publishing
is a numbering system. I use the #1 then #2 then #3 etc etc. At first I
did not use that and payed the price of wasted time in finding.

So by August, I should return to book publishing on Internet and easily
render those chemistry books and then start to give the second and third
editions of some of the above Internet published books.



This was the section of my 1990's website for Chemistry:

--- quoting the topics of my old 1990's website ---

CHEMISTRY

My photograph of a picture from the book VAN NOSTRAND's SCIENTIFIC
ENCYCLOPEDIA, 1995, page 2376. The caption below the picture reads: ---
Fig.2 Polar representation of periodic relationship of the elements.
(Source: Omnibix, USA) At upper right is shown the conventional
representation. --- It is my guess that the periodic elements can only
be wrongly represented in Euclidean flat space but that a circular, a
Riemannian space is needed to accurately and truthfully represent the
periodic table of elements. That some factor such as cosmic abundance
for each element, or isotope when considered in a periodic chart would
not make sense if the chart were Euclidean flat space. Euclidean flat
space is the usual way of portraying the Chemical Elements. But it is my
guess based on the Motaatom harmonics that a logarithmic spiral with a
neutron in the center spiraling out through hydrogen then helium,
encompassing all the isotopes, that with this added number factor of
cosmic abundance that each isotope and thus element has a area of that
logarithmic spiral that is exact, with no gaps and no holes and exact
and even depicting the lining-up of chemical homologs. My guess is that
space itself is fitted exactly with an exact proportion of isotopes and
that if the universe say had one atom of silver too much in proportion
to the other elements , then the universe could not exist. We are a long
way off in writing a accurate Chart of the Chemical Elements and my
guess is that when we get closer to the truth, that Chart will be in the
form of a logarithmic spiral, perhaps 3-dimensional and it will be
connected to some numbers particular to the isotope 231PU. (Lastly, the
two pictures on this webpage are spherical.)



041 Characteristics (superlatives) of the Chemical Elements and a
Definitive Naming of all of the Chemical Elements and Isotopes

042 Motaatom Harmonic Oscillators; prediction of cosmic abundance of
Isotopes
043 Motaatom Harmonic Oscillators; LINEAR based as all laws of physics are

044 Superconductor formula: Highest temperature superconductor atomic
bonds = geometry
Earth's 1st AirConditioner



044a Humanity progress is now faced with the imperative challenge of
controlling the weather on Earth via a global AirConditioner
044b A tandem solution to create Earth's 1st AirConditioner and to halt
Global Warming
044c the tandem coolants of Earth's 1st AirConditioner are Ice Dust from
Mesosphere to about 300km up, plus Ozone replenishment via NxOy molecules
044d Microbes that will multiply in the upper atmosphere in the future
and threaten life on ground

--- end quoting old website topics ---


What this editing and organizing is forcing me to do is to concentrate
on Chemistry, for which I would not have done otherwise.

I believe I can contribute on making a "newer Schrodinger and Dirac
Equations" and thus overhaul all of chemistry.

The above shows me that I was just flailing with the Motaatom idea.
The above shows me that my contributions to chemistry in the 1990s
were merely practical applications outcomes such as Superconductivity
and Global Warming. I still think that the progress of Superconductivity
although physics will be a part of chemistry in application and likewise
the building of Earth's First Air Conditioner will end up as a Chemistry
challenge. So I think I should include two books in Chemistry for the
practical application of Superconductivity theory and for the solving
of Global Warming. Both my chemistry freshman textbooks include chapters
on superconductivity and atmospheric science.

But as far as new theory for chemistry, I think I will throw out the
Motaatom idea which really was not much of an idea in the first place
other than my recognition in the 1990s that already, I was having a hole
in chemistry theory and my attempt to fill that hole with a new
chemistry theory.

But now I do have a new chemistry theory which came out of my wanderings
in mathematics when I did the AP-adics Primer book and by December 2007
and or January 2008 with the aid of the second edition CHEM ONE by
Waser, Trueblood, Knobler, 1980 and with the aid of mathematics of
AP-adics, I realized how the Schrodinger Equation must be revised and
updated and modernized for the Atom Totality theory.

This revision of the Schrodinger Equation will revise all of Chemistry
since it changes how we look at the Chemical Bonding.

I promised not to start any new books of science in this vacation period
where I sort out the books already published, but that was the whole
point of sorting out was to be able to move forward. So I am going to
start those new Chemistry books today, and although I will not dive into
them, at least by starting them I can remember in August of 2008 to fill
out those new books on Chemistry.

The title of this textbook looks daunting at the moment but it will
probably look like this
once completed:

Chemistry: Chemical Bond

The 20th century lived with the Schrodinger Equation and never revised
it. I suppose it
took all the energy of thinking just to get acquinted with the
Schrodinger Equation in the
20th century. There was a tiny bit of progress in improving the
Schrodinger Equation with
the Dirac Equation for which it addressed the lack of a relativistic
Schrodinger Equation.
But the Dirac Equation is really little to no progress when we
consider the Atom Totality
theory. Because the Atom Totality is not relativistic is it? The Atom
Totality is a single
big atom which is all inclusive. So, do we need a relativistic
Schrodinger Equation? No!
In a Big Bang theory, a relativistic Schrodinger Equation would make
some sense and thus
the Dirac Equation makes more sense if the Universe were a Big Bang,
but it is not a Big Bang.
And we can recognize this by the fact that the Dirac Equation has
never really predicted
anything but simply turned the Schrodinger Equation into a
Relativistic Schrodinger Equation.

However, Dirac comes out of this without any glory for his Dirac
Equation but rather with
alot of glory for his terminology of the Dirac Ocean or Dirac Sea of
positrons.

Back in December of 2007, I was fixing the mathematical foundation of
Numbers in mathematics
which flow from the foundation of Geometry in mathematics. That there
exists three and only
three types of geometry for which Plane Euclidean geometry is the
amalgamation of
positive curvature Elliptic Geometry put together with negative
curvature Hyperbolic geometry

In other words, if you have Plane Euclidean or Solid Euclidean
Geometry and you Symmetry
break Euclidean Geometry, out pops two geometries of Elliptic and
Hyperbolic.

Euclid Geometry is the union of Elliptic and Hyperbolic Geometry and
when you cause
a Symmetry Breaking of Euclid Geometry you have these two new
geometries.

The subject of Chemistry is all about the electrons of atoms, the
outermost electrons specifically.

The outermost electrons is explained by the Schrodinger Equation and
one of its explanations
is that the electron is the electron-dot-cloud. The dot cloud is a
probability of finding an electron
in a certain position from the nucleus of an atom. Well, here steps in
the Atom Totality theory
and says that we know much more about the dot-cloud. We know the dot
cloud is in fact
the electron itself.

The Dot Cloud of an Electron by the Schrodinger Equation consists of
three entities. It consists
of a positive curvature Elliptic Geometry where the dots of the dot-
cloud are found, but it consists
also of a negative curvature Hyperbolic Geometry. So the Schrodinger
Equation consists of
three things for describing an electron of an atom:

(1) positive curvature Elliptic Geometry for a hydrogen and helium
atom of 1s it is the
spherical ball around the nucleus
(2) the dots of the electron-dot-cloud that are scattered in this
spherical ball and where
the dots are a tiny piece of the hydrogen and helium electron. When
you assemble all
the dots into one, you have a collapsed-electron which can flow in
electric wires but
when you have them in the probability wavefunction they are
uncollapsed electrons.
(3) negative curvature Hyperbolic Geometry.

The Schrodinger Equation missed the Hyperbolic Geometry. It was always
there but no-one
realized that when you have Elliptic Geometry you always have
accompanying it with Hyperbolic
Geometry.

This Hyperbolic Geometry is very important for it is the force of
gravity itself. The force of
gravity is a Coulomb force. It is the tiniest Coulomb force for it is
10^40 weaker in coupling
strength to Coulomb force. Gravity is this Hyperbolic geometry that
accompanies every
dot-cloud of electrons with their Elliptic geometry. So the Hyperbolic
geometry is what
Dirac used to call the Dirac Ocean of positrons.

So the reason that the Earth goes around the Sun is because the mass
of the Sun warps
the space around the Sun and thus Earth follows into that warped space
and thus revolves
around the Sun. Another way of saying this is that the Sun itself is a
dot of the electron-dot-cloud
of a Atom Totality and this Sun-dot has accompanying a Hyperbolic bent
space and the planet
Earth is following in that Hyperbolic bent space.

Alright, so all of that was a preliminary. Now let me get to the
Chemical Bond.

We have three types of chemical bond (1) ionic (2) covalant (3)
metallic and we have
all sorts of hybrids of these three types.

Now, let me quickly say how the Revised Schrodinger Equation explains
the Chemical Bond.

Electrons repulse one another so when Elliptic geometry of dot-clouds
as electrons meet
other Elliptic geometry of dot-clouds they do not bond. However, they
have Hyperbolic geometry
accompanying them also. So the Chemical Bond of one atom to a second
atom is a result
of the Hyperbolic geometry better suited to the other atom.

So in essence the revision for the Schrodinger Equation is the
recognition that the electrons
of atoms have three parts: dot-cloud, Elliptic geometry, Hyperbolic
geometry.

And the Chemical Bond itself is the interplay between these three
parts, especially the
Hyperbolic geometry which was completely missing in Chemistry.

Come August I will dive in depth with this. I do not see having to
change much of anything
to the Schrodinger Equation itself, just a pointing out of the idea
that they forgot to use
the Hyperbolic geometry in the Schrodinger Equation. Also, the fact
that both physicists
and chemists never got over the "interpretation of the Schrodinger
Equation" Science wants
more than interpretation but wants validation and conclusion.

When I dive into this book come August, I should start with the most
electrical conductive and least electrical conductive elements. Which
would be
copper, silver and gold which are metallic bonds and I suppose the
inert gases
are the least electrical conductive. The reason I should start with
them is to explain
how the Hyperbolic geometry overlap influences the Elliptic geometry
overlap in the
Schrodinger Equation.

So that in a metallic bond or a ionic bond or in a covalent bond,
there is not only the
Elliptic geometry overlap but the Hyperbolic geometry overlap.

So why is silver, copper and gold so great of electrical conductors?
The answer is
the metallic bond. And the answer is the Schrodinger Equation makes
the metallic
bond of silver in such a way that the Hyperbolic geometry overlap with
the
Elliptic geometry overlap forms the highest electrical conductor

The Hyperbolic overlap in metals forms what one can describe as
MicroWires in
atoms and compounds. Here I am going to have to distinguish between
electrons
as collapsed wavefunction versus uncollapsed wavefunction. But this
can wait
till August.