Dave--
Maybe the mass/ energy relation is different for quarks than it is for
electrons, since the mass of each is a different animal. It seems from quark
parameters that at least the charge is different for quarks and electrons.
However, I think the quark spin comes in 1/2 integral values of Plank's
constant h however just as an electron or positron. Of course the mass of a
quark is only virtual and to my knowledge has not been measured.
I do not know of anything that says the rest mass of an electron is based on
the same reason as the rest mass of hadrons. The mass of each is not predicted
by any theory TMK.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: David Roberson
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Bob,
I was surprised to read that the angular energy was many times the mass of
the electron according to Hotson. My first thought was-why does the mass to
charge ratio of an electron appear to match that expected if the 511 keV mass
is assumed. One would expect that the excess angular energy would result in
additional mass for the electron which would be detected in experiments.
I am still reading the document and perhaps this issue might be explained
later. I remain convinced that magnetic interaction plays an important role in
LENR. Maybe it is spin coupling that allows the transport of such a large
quantity of energy from the nucleus without the gammas. And, the density of
the metal matrix is far greater than the level the plasma guys work with. Any
evidence of spin coupling they encounter will be overwhelmed by the majority of
reactions where it is not likely to be demonstrated.
We need proof that large quantities of energy can be exchanged by
spin...either to one or to many receptors. Another possibility is that spin
coupling is frequently available among atoms and acts as a common exchange
method. Of course one must wonder how this process could have escaped
detection for so long.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Fri, Apr 25, 2014 12:02 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Dave, Mark and Jones--
Hotson's reason for leaving physics for French identifies a real glitch in my
mind. (See the item about the author at the beginning of the first paper.)
This may be the issue behind the lack of consideration of angular momentum
and spin as being energy as we know it, and why the standing physics community
shuns the consideration of spin coupling in nuclear processes and hence lenr.
Spin energy consideration opens a can of worms for them.
From the beginning (1989) in the case of D "fusion" I thought that the
reaction to form He was that He started out in a highly energetic spin state
and decayed to a lower energy ground state distributing its excess energy to
the lattice via spin coupling. Now I wonder what the spin energy of two
protons is? Hotson indicated that the spin energy of the electron is much
greater than the .511 Mev we associate with its creation. It may be that a
.511 Mev photon actually carries much more energy in the form of angular
momentum than is generally associated with the linear momentum particle model
and Einstein's photo electric effect.
I did not realize that the angular momentum of the electron and positron
amounted to so much energy. This is an interesting observation of Hotson, if
it is valid which it seems to be.
I wonder what school Hotson was at when they silenced him?
Bob Cook
----- Original Message -----
From: David Roberson
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 8:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
This is an interesting paper. It is good reading for those of us that
wonder if current theory is flawed.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Fri, Apr 25, 2014 11:19 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Thanks Terry--
I could not find any.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Blanton" <hohlr...@gmail.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 5:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Hotson’s essays move around. Most of my old links are dead.
I have combined all three of Hotson's papers into a single .pdf file.
The link provided here is for list members' use only:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBNEg4T25LS0FQM3c/edit?usp=sharing
