Thanks all. I believe that we are getting close but are not quite there yet. Gravity waves contain energy with its poynting vector reversed thus it conveys negative energy. The movement of mass couples with a gravitational wave. It is no surprise the that gravity as it propagates may be coupled to the speed of sound in the nucleus. I don't quite know yet why a superconductor is required. Perhaps the gravitational wave must be somehow coupled to energy transfers within the bulk of the superconductor. As for predictions the model produces the known results previously mentioned An extrapolation of the model shows how to induce a gravitomagnetic field for propulsion and how to increase the strength of the nuclear spin orbit force for energy production. These two results are very important and will be proven in time. I stand on record with these predictions. I am sorry you don't like it Jones and your in good company Ed Storms does not like it either. I'm looking forwaed to seeing Ed again. I visited him some years ago.
Lane thank you for helping me. You produced the energy levels of the muonic atom with the formulations and we are also on record with that. That was a prediction that I did not make. Again, Jones, its another result. Thank you for pointing out that gravity is not energy. I get caught up hinking about waves as energy, and get sloppy. I am not a scientist. But the idea intrigues me that there is a speed in the nucleus at which aves might travel. And if there is no energy involved, or no energy ost when considering a photon, then I don't understand how resistance as any meaning. If gravity travels at the same speed as light in a vacuum, then perhaps t travels at the same speed as light in matter. If Frank is correct, hen one prediction is that the speed of gravity in a superconductor ill be found to be 1094xxx meters / second, from the previous eference. Craig -----Original Message----- From: Craig Haynie <cchayniepub...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Thu, Dec 2, 2010 11:41 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:Quantum Transitional State hank you for pointing out that gravity is not energy. I get caught up hinking about waves as energy, and get sloppy. I am not a scientist. But the idea intrigues me that there is a speed in the nucleus at which aves might travel. And if there is no energy involved, or no energy ost when considering a photon, then I don't understand how resistance as any meaning. If gravity travels at the same speed as light in a vacuum, then perhaps t travels at the same speed as light in matter. If Frank is correct, hen one prediction is that the speed of gravity in a superconductor ill be found to be 1094xxx meters / second, from the previous eference. Craig n Thu, 2010-12-02 at 10:23 -0800, Jones Beene wrote: -----Original Message----- From: Craig Haynie > Conceptually, gravity traveling in a superconductor is essentially the same thing as light traveling in the nucleus: it's just energy traveling without resistance through matter. This does not follow, Craig. And this whole line of bogosity about defining uantum transitions as a speed is getting almost to the point of lunacy. 1) What makes you think a nucleus offers no resistance? 2) What makes you think that gravity is energy? Gravity is a force, and a orce is NOT energy. A force can have potential energy and be converted into nergy, but is not energy. > If Frank is right, then these gravity waves are traveling at 1094000 m/s. This has little to do with anyone's quantum theory. This is the approximate scape velocity of our sun. Jones
