* The macrocosm and the microcosm, the same thing *

Of ferman: Fernando Mancebo Rodriguez---
Personal page. ----Spanish pages

You can see many of my works, in the following pages:

PHYSICS:

Video: Cosmic and atomic model

Double slit and camera obscura experiments: ferman experiment |||
Type of Waves: Questions of Quantum Mechanics

The socurces of gravity. |||
In favour of the cosmos theory of ferman FCM |||
Theory of Everything: summary

Model of Cosmos. |||
Atomic model |||
Development speed of forces.|||
Magnets: N-S magnetic polarity.

Stellar molecules |||
Static and Dynamic chaos|||
Inversion or Left-right proof |||
Scheme approach TOE

Chart of atomic measures|||
The main foundations of the Cosmos' Structure |||
Unstable particles in accelerators

Short summary atomic model |||
Positive electric charges reside in orbits.|||
Mathematical cosmic model based on Pi.

Inexactness principle in observations |||
Einstein and the gravity |||
The Universal Motion |||
Atomic particles

Cosmic Geometry |||
Bipolar electronic: semiconductors |||
Multiverse or multi-worlds|||
Light and photons

Quantum explanation of Gravity |||
Real physics versus virtual physics |||
The window experiment

Atomic Density |||
Linkin: Coeficients Lcf Mcf |||
Atomic nuclei structuring: Short summary

Few points about Cosmic Structuring.|||
What is Time|||
Simultaneity |||
The Cosmic tree |||
The Cosmic entropy

Interesting and short life of neutrons |||
Leptons field

MATHEMATICS:

Radial coordinates.|||
Physical and mathematical sets theory. | Algebraic product of sets.

Planar angles: Trimetry.|||
Fractions: natural portions.|||
Cosmic spiral |||
Inverse values of parameters and operation

Equivalence and commutive property of division. |||
Concepts and Numbers. |||
Bend coefficient of curves |||
Mathematical dimensions

Transposition property |||
Accumulated product: Powers |||
Dimensional Geometry: Reversibility

Priority Rule in powers and roots |||
The decimal counter |||
The floating point index |||
Paradoxes in mathematics

Direct formula for Pi: The Squaring Pi. |||
The pyramids of Squaring Pi. |||
Functions of Pi |||
Integration formulas Pi.

Squaring the Circle |||
Cocktail formula for Squaring Pi.|||
Orbital coordinates in motion: Summary

Oscillating function: Cartesian oscillators |||
The ciclo as unit of angular speed |||
Squaring circles ruler and compass |||

Video: Squaring circles ruler and compass |||
The number Phi and the circumference.speed |||

The The extended Pi |||
Angles trisection|||
Squaring the Circle regarding Phi|||
Video of the two squares method

Discusion about the Pi as transcendental number|||:
Not transcendental Pi

OTHER:

Spherical molecules. |||
Genetic Heredity. |||
Metaphysics: Spanish only. |||
Brain and Consciousness. |||
Type of Genes T and D

Certainty Principle |||
From the Schrodinger cat to the Ferman's birds |||
The meaning of Dreams

Freely economy |||
Theoricles of Alexandria |||
Rainbow table of elements.|||
Satire on the Quantum Mechanics

Cancer and precocious aging |||
Hardware and software of Genetics |||
The farmer and the quantum physicist|||

INVENTIONS:

Andalusian Roof Tile. |||
Rotary Engine. |||
Water motors: Vaporization engines.

Triangular ferman's Houses .|||
Pan for frying and poaching eggs |||
The fringed forest

ARTICLES:

The Emperor's new clothes and the QM |||
Garbage Triangle: Quantum mechanics, Relativity, Standard theory

Fables and tales of the relativists clocks.|||
Nuclei of galaxies.|||
Particles accelerators.

Hydrocarbons, water and vital principles on the Earth. |||
Cosmos formula : Metaphysics

Ubiquity Principle of set.|||
Positive electric charges reside in orbits.

Chaos Fecundity. Symbiosis: from the Chaos to the Evolution.|||
Speed-Chords in galaxies.

The ancient planets Asteron and Poseidon.|||
The man and the testosterone.|||
Toros say |||
The essence of life

METAPHYSICS:

Video Universal Consciousness||| Who is God |||
Web Universal consciousness

Email: ferman30@yahoo.es

The macrocosm and the microcosm, the same thing

Friends, I suppose it may to be seen ill-considered to contradict current scientific currents, but I understand that I must expose my differences.

I understand that one of the great errors in physics in recent times has been the stubbornness in defending that the structure of the macrocosm is totally different from that of the microcosm, that is, that the elements and structural laws of both are totally different.

It seems that against all logic and observation, human beings cannot accept that the structure of their world cannot be repeated throughout the universe, and even at other levels such as the microcosm.

But if we accept a debatable and possible equality between the microcosm and the macrocosm, and proceed to make comparisons between them, we will soon see that all their physical elements and behavior coincide.

Let's see,

Both at the atomic and stellar level, material systems are shaped in the same way in atoms and stars:

- A central nucleus with satellites around it (suns-planets; and atomic nuclei-electrons).

- Satellites in turn have other orbitals with them (planets-moons and electrons-neutrinos)

- The dimensions (mass) of all these elements are also of the same ratio between them: from 1 to 10^3 between nuclei and satellites.

From 1 to 10^3 between satellites (planets-electrons) and their companions (moons-neutrinos)

- The ratio, system radius/nucleus radius, both in atoms and in stars 10^4.

In addition to the material elements, structuring (orbital) and relative dimensions, there is also agreement in other physical principles and laws.

We can cite, for example the Pauli exclusion principle, which is fulfilled in atoms and stars, that is, in an orbit there can only be a single stable orbital.

So the question could be: Why then do we insist on not accepting a concordance and similarity of elements and structure?

Well, it seems that it is due to not very correct considerations established by physicists of the last century, for example Maxwell when considering that an electron could not orbit around the central nucleus because it would lose energy and fall in the nucleus attracted by its positive charge.

Sure, this would be correct if the positive charges were in the nucleus, but everything suggests that this is not correct, and that the charges are in electromagnetic orbit around the nucleus.

In this case, the electrons would be attracted and would be forced to stay indefinitely in these positive orbits.

But why should it be understood that positive charges are in the orbits and not in the nucleus? Well, because it is these orbits that capture and give up the electrons and not the nucleus that they never access.

Well, instead of making comparisons and drawing conclusions, we have preferred to invent formulas on probabilities (never verified), uncertainty principles to cover those solutions that we not know how to find, and make different distinctions and laws for each place in the cosmos:

At our level, a classical laws

At the atomic level, a quantum and uncertainty laws

At the speed of light, times, spaces, masses, etc. go changing

In the different places of the cosmos local times and spaces, and disconnected from each other.

Etc.

Well, it is current scientific philosophy. I hope that some positive result is reached, which for now I do not see.

And to finish another new question:

How can we claim or expect a theory of unification of elements and cosmic forces (TOE) if for the same elements, (matter, mass, gravity, magnetism, etc.) we establish different laws in the different places of the Cosmos?

That is contradictory and impossible to achieve.