So then, are the radius that electrons orbit at, points where the
'uncertainty' of their position becomes evenly distributed around the atom,
such that they exist in all those positions simultaneously?
Essentially a maximization and perfection of their uncertainty.
Also, if this is so, would it
I think you are asking the correct questions. As I have come to read more
about the RM and think about their behavior, I have come to respect
Winterberg's concept to a greater degree.
The RM snowflakes have a high magnetic moment due to their large flat
orbitals, and apparently the atoms in the
As Professor KVK Nehru has elucidated, you're right, the sun is powered by
decays of the heavy elements
in the center ( That seems so self evident, it's hard to imagine where
this other stuff came from,
as if the neutrino experiments ad nauseum wouldn't have invalidated that theory
long
It is an interesting speculation. Nature is a truly immense experiment,
particularly when considering the number of atoms present. Immense nuclear
trials are constantly happening all around us. If this type of sub-nuclear
shuffle were happening with the "less difficulty" that you describe, it
Jed, Eric and Alain,
The patent system has never worked (as most other *complicated* laws. There
are too many details and possibilities to find loopholes.
I do understand that the system sounds as it will provide fairness.
However, I have been involved when companies said 'the owner of this person
John, I have mainly been referring to the behavior of static orbitals of
electrons. If you induce a changing field, etc. to the environment then it is
quite likely that radiation would be emitted. For example, if an RF field is
used to drive the system then the orbitals should adjust in
Side note for the aestheticists amongst us: Isn't it likely that a hexagonal
geometry of pico-snowflakes is a generic form which is reflected in
structures all the way down to dense hydrogen? It's no coincidence that
iron oxide as catalyst, takes on the classic hexagonal nanostructure, and
this
RE: [Vo]: How many atoms to make condensed matter?Jones--
Geometry is probably reflected all the way down. The geometry of the nuclei
are fixed on the stability of the tetrahedron per Norman Cook’s model for
nuclei. Rossi seems to agree with him and probably refers to this stability
From: Bob Higgins
* Can you say what evidence the natural state should exhibit if such a
sub-nuclear shuffle were as "less difficult" as you describe? Are there
natural occurrences that can be looked for that could validate such a
proposition?
Indeed – such a radical shift would have
http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2015/11/quantum-dots-made-from-fool%E2%80%99s-gold-boost-battery-performance/
all the regular characters Fe, Li plus Sulphur at the nano geometries we are
concerned with.
My dear friends
You can think about me what you wish
but this idea:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/11/nov-13-2015-idea-lenr-mmanagement.html
is NOT crazy.
Peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Lennart Thornros wrote:
Jed's opinion that all governmental protection laws will slow the process
> down is probably accurate in a country like the US.
>
No I do not think it will slow down the overall process. Perhaps by year or
so but that does not matter. The extra cost
Some of this thread has gotten to some of the basics relating to magnetism,
which is a bit of a mystery to me. There's the dynamic magnetism that
arises through a moving current. And there's the static magnetism that is
created through the formation of magnetic domains in a ferromagnetic
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> It will be supported by all the Exxon, GM, etc. also. However, in
>> Bangladesh or Zimbabwe the situation is different. The market can be
>> established over night.
>>
>
> Nonsense. These countries are not capable of
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 12:25 AM, David Roberson wrote:
I consider electrons in orbits as being equivalent to a superconductor
> current since the orbits do not collapse with time. No power is radiated
> by an electron orbital and hence no work is required to keep it in the
Eric, replace the lossy magnet by a superconducting magnet and you get the same
result without requiring any additional work to be done. The loss in the
current carrying magnet is due to series resistance and if that resistance is
eliminated it would not require any additional power once the
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 12:25 AM, David Roberson wrote:
The loss in the current carrying magnet is due to series resistance and if
> that resistance is eliminated it would not require any additional power
> once the current is set up.
>
I was thinking about that. But let's
Thanks for the paper. I should also mention Hopf fibrings solution(s) of
Maxwell equations that is EM is confined in a volume. Radiationless
solutions is also required for an electron model where the the spin is a
complex dynamics where the instantaneous magnetic moment is not parallel
Its very hard to see how a single flake can transform between a planar atomic
crystal state and ultra dense linear paired vortex. But perhaps there is a
mechanism based on energetic and state conservation effects.
Assuming the effect is more classical and simple however could the switch
between
19 matches
Mail list logo