In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sun, 21 Apr 2013 00:41:16 -0400:
Hi Axil,
[snip]
http://crystalchannelers.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/new-science-the-widom-larsen-low-energy-nuclear-reactions-lenr-theory/
WL has gone with Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) electrons. This is a
mistake,they cannot
The recent verification of the Higgs mechanism shows a connection between
the electroweak force and spontaneous production of the W-bosons, W+ and W-
involving spontaneous symmetry breaking.
When sufficient electromagnetic charge carrying gage photons are
concentrated near the nucleus of the
On 4/21/2013 2:30 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
When sufficient electromagnetic charge carrying gage photons are
concentrated near the nucleus of the atom, The coupling constant
between the charge carrying photons and the Higgs field will increase
sufficiently to produce W+ or W- electroweak bosons
I've read all that. But your definitions seem in conflict with what I've
read.
- joe
On 4/21/2013 3:41 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
See
Feynman's view of quantum electrodynamics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_electrodynamics
See
Force carrier
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_carrier
Joseph did you read this?
Gauge theories are important as the successful field theories explaining
the dynamics of elementary
particleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particles.
Quantum electrodynamicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_electrodynamicsis
an
abelian
I have. I'm very familiar with the Standard Model.
Let's just concentrate on one piece first.
When you say
change a neutron into a proton through color change
I'm not sure what you're saying. When a neutron decays to a proton (plus
e- and neutrino), it's because a d quark has decayed to a u
Thanks, It's flavor, not color.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Joseph S. Barrera III j...@barrera.orgwrote:
I have. I'm very familiar with the Standard Model.
Let's just concentrate on one piece first.
When you say
change a neutron into a proton through color change
I'm not sure
Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 5:30 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NASA screws up bad.
The recent verification of the Higgs mechanism shows a connection between the
electroweak force and spontaneous production of the W-bosons, W+ and W-
involving spontaneous symmetry breaking.
When sufficient electromagnetic
On 4/21/2013 5:06 PM, David Roberson wrote:
It seems a little premature to talk about the behavior of the Higgs
particle at this point. I am not aware of any tests that have been
conducted to support the assumed characteristics
It appears to (a) have spin 0 and (b) interacts with other
pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NASA screws up bad.
On 4/21/2013 5:06 PM, David Roberson wrote:
It seems a little premature to talk about the behavior of the Higgs
particle at this point. I am not aware of any tests that have been
conducted to support the assumed characteristics
It appears to (a) have
...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 5:30 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NASA screws up bad.
The recent verification of the Higgs mechanism shows a connection
between the electroweak force and spontaneous production of the W-bosons,
W+ and W- involving spontaneous symmetry
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 6:15 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Many of the great discoveries were there in plain view for years until
someone got lucky. My favorite example is the laser which could have been
discovered over 100 years ago (gas type instead of ruby rod) had physics
LENR may well be an outgrowth of the Higgs field. Now wouldn’t that be
something?
Poetic justice Axil.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NASA screws up bad.
It seems
Message-
From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 9:28 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NASA screws up bad.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 6:15 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote:
Many of the great discoveries were there in plain view
: Joseph S. Barrera III j...@barrera.org
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 8:14 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NASA screws up bad.
On 4/21/2013 5:06 PM, David Roberson wrote:
It seems a little premature to talk about the behavior of the Higgs
particle at this point. I am
:21 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NASA screws up bad.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism
Achaemenides developed the first celestreal computer
The Antikythera mechanism (pron.: /ˌæntɨkɨˈθɪərə/ ant-i-ki-theer-ə or
/ˌæntɨˈkɪθərə/ ant-i-kith-ə-rə) is an ancient analog computer[1][2
On 4/21/2013 6:15 PM, David Roberson wrote:
It is important that the Higgs appears to have the correct spin.
This apparently is required to get to the starting gate. Are you aware
of any recent measurements of this interaction with other particles
which can only occur in this manner?
I can
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 10:31 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NASA screws up bad.
The Higg particle(s) is not the important consideration. It is the action of
the Higgs field that makes the electroweak force work.
The Higgs mechanism was incorporated into modern particle physics
screws up bad.
On 4/21/2013 6:15 PM, David Roberson wrote:
It is important that the Higgs appears to have the correct spin.
This apparently is required to get to the starting gate. Are you aware
of any recent measurements of this interaction with other particles
which can only occur
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 9:28 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NASA screws up bad.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 6:15 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote:
Many of the great discoveries were there in plain view for years until
someone got lucky. My favorite example
On 4/21/2013 7:58 PM, David Roberson wrote:
There may be much more evidence than I am aware of regarding the
behavior of the Higgs, but I am of the understanding that there are not
many of these to observe. Of course, the decay particles can be
measured, but in my way of thinking this is a
NASA has screwed up bad. They have embraced both the Widom-Larsen (W-L)
theory and polaritons in the same framework. They are incompatible.
In the NASA LENR patent as follows:
“A method for producing heavy electrons is based on a material system that
includes an electrically-conductive material
http://crystalchannelers.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/new-science-the-widom-larsen-low-energy-nuclear-reactions-lenr-theory/
WL has gone with Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) electrons. This is a
mistake,they cannot do this because of the lack of energy density in the
SPP, IMHO.
The WL theory must
23 matches
Mail list logo
