Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
Bob!
Let's do the neutrinos later .. we now can just smell them - at least we
believe it.
At least for the SO(4) fusion model we don't need them so far as all
energies can be explained without neutrinos - what was a surprise!
J.W.
Am 08.02.20 um 18:06 schrieb bobcook39...@hotmail.com:
The consideration of the creation of new space with the release of EM
energy is a model that may explain the increase of entropy in
classical thermodynamic theory for closed systems with conservation of
total energy. ( However, neutrinos also need to be considered
assuming they have mass energy at their local space. They may be
like a photon in free space, but which are an odd magnetic flux
rotation—a fraction of 2pi radians-- .) 2pi/3 comes to mind as a
potential option for their odd rotation. That’s what it takes to make
any angular momentum.)
Bob Cook
Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
Windows 10
*From: *bobcook39...@hotmail.com <mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>
*Sent: *Saturday, February 8, 2020 8:32 AM
*To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
*Subject: *RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
Jurg—
Four questions that come to mind are:
* What is the distance in 3-D space between the D*-D* centers needed
to start a common rotation of their respective flux rotations?
* What matching is necessary of angular alignment of the axes of the
respective flux rotation toruses, if any, to allow the common
rotation and transition to a He* with the creation of new free space?
* And does the new space volume (in 3-D) have any local time
associated with flux rotation frequency or is there no local
frequency of magnetic flux—i.e., no flux in the new space once the
photon leaves the new space?
* Is there any specific volume in 3-D associated with the new space?
These questions may be good to consider at the workshop.
Bob
*From: *Jürg Wyttenbach <mailto:ju...@datamart.ch>
*Sent: *Friday, February 7, 2020 2:42 PM
*To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
*Subject: *Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional
hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a
pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can
dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form
blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the
lattice.
The restriction for Mills/hydrino like condensation is given by the
symmetry of the fields and space. Orbits with same mass and topology
can condensate what means start a common rotation what classically
frees space-time what is equivalent to releasing energy.
As said: In the Holmlid case we see such orbit pairing going downhill
from 8 H* --> 2 4-He (8-Be) with a proton finally taking over the
excess energy. This has nothing in common with Mills model as there
always must be a final state with a higher stability/density = number
of flux rotations.
There is just one more rotation possible for one symmetric mass pair
and thus there is only one H*-H* state fora a pair of protons where as
D*-D* can have 4 bonds.
Consequently the next H*-H* condensation only works if you have 2
H*-H* and does not work not for a single pair. This is what Mills missed.
J.W.
Am 07.02.20 um 16:54 schrieb bobcook39...@hotmail.com
<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>:
Fran—
You seem to imply that nature changes depending on your
observation position—at the center of a local hydrogen at 3^rd
base of a lattice nuclet or far away in the batter’s box. Is my
inference correct?
Also you suggest more than one temporal (time) direction. This
suggests 3 or maybe 6 possible time directions relative to 3^rd
base—up, down, back front left or right. Can you explain temporal
direction in more detail? Is there _no_global time that applies
to all points in space, once that point is created?
Bob Cook
*From: *Roarty, Francis X <mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com>
*Sent: *Thursday, February 6, 2020 10:37 PM
*To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
*Subject: *RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
Hi Jones, I still suspect Casimir geometry is actually
relativistic and the math they are using is giving the dimensions
from local hydrogen perspective while from our perspective the
hydrogen inside the hydride dilates becoming both faster and
“relatively” smaller, packing out further and further on the
temporal axis while simultaneously getting harder and harder to
detect from the macro world. I think Mills was accurate about self
catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like
cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground
floor I sus
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
Am 08.02.20 um 17:32 schrieb bobcook39...@hotmail.com: Jurg— Four questions that come to mind are: * What is the distance in 3-D space between the D*-D* centers needed to start a common rotation of their respective flux rotations? In H*-H*/D*-D* the proton perturbative mass joins the flux in a new common rotation. Normally we should assume that a nuclear mass part assumes a nuclear orbit given by the charge radius. But all wave coupling produces a virtual charge and the radius of this virtual charge must be much larger. I did not yet try to model this new idea as I'm myself currently in a low energy mode... I once calculated it for H*-H* using 3D fields only and the result was about 2.4pm or a bit larger than what Holmlid believes. But we simply do not have enough experimental support that we would need to exclude some parts of the equation. The first step of the formation of D*-D* is Rydberg like SO(4) spin matter. This aligns the proton spin(s) and will result in a 4-He like structure due to the added orbit force. But one open key question is: How - if - will the spin waves extend ? Does this lead to a tighter radius - stronger coupling or just to a steric more stable cluster? How do the spin orbits interact with the catalyst? What matching is necessary of angular alignment of the axes of the respective flux rotation toruses, if any, to allow the common rotation and transition to a He* with the creation of new free space? This is to complex to explain in an e-mail. All mass in 4-He is core "4 rotation" mass which can be decomposed from 4x 4 to 2x2 and finally 1x1. We can discuss this (details) in the workshop as it is part of the early model already. And does the new space volume (in 3-D) have any local time associated with flux rotation frequency or is there no local frequency of magnetic flux—i.e., no flux in the new space once the photon leaves the new space? Time is always represented by the frequency that only depends on speed of light and the total torus path length. Of course this is one key issues - how the change in topology and number of rotations influences the path length. I did notice that some SM assumptions e.g. about live time are wrong because they use a to short path. And Is there any specific volume in 3-D associated with the new space? The space we finally use to calculate energy quantities is the classic 3D space. For this purpose we need to do projections. The only general thing we can do is to relate energy to lost 3D space what is a first approximation only. I can show the 4p --> 4-He changes. It would be keen to define new space measures as in 6D (SO(4)) you can have multiple forms of "space" e.g. 4D,5D volumes. One thing we know is that in SO(4) the magnetic flux runs on the higher D (4D, or 5D manifolds) torus surface and not in the 3D volume otherwise the projection would not deliver the correct results we see. Thus if we talk of space-time conversion to photon energy then this might not 100% match the real 3D space we free, as the numbers of rotations (2 or 3) are not always the same and even more important: The real space a nucleus occupies is *given* by the *larges charge radius* that couples two orbits. This you can see if you once check nuclear data. But the universe expands because photons always flow outwards what generates an outward pressure! It's like a heating pot at ultra large scale. J.W. * Is there any specific volume in 3-D associated with the new space? These questions may be good to consider at the workshop. Bob *From: *Jürg Wyttenbach <mailto:ju...@datamart.ch> *Sent: *Friday, February 7, 2020 2:42 PM *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> *Subject: *Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the lattice. The restriction for Mills/hydrino like condensation is given by the symmetry of the fields and space. Orbits with same mass and topology can condensate what means start a common rotation what classically frees space-time what is equivalent to releasing energy. As said: In the Holmlid case we see such orbit pairing going downhill from 8 H* --> 2 4-He (8-Be) with a proton finally taking over the excess energy. This has nothing in common with Mills model as there always must be a final state with a higher stability/density = number of flux rotations. There is just one more rotation possible for one symmetric mass pair and thus there is only one H*-H* state fora a pair of protons where as D*-D* can have 4 bonds. Consequently the next H*-H* condensation only works
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
The consideration of the creation of new space with the release of EM energy is a model that may explain the increase of entropy in classical thermodynamic theory for closed systems with conservation of total energy. ( However, neutrinos also need to be considered assuming they have mass energy at their local space. They may be like a photon in free space, but which are an odd magnetic flux rotation—a fraction of 2pi radians-- .) 2pi/3 comes to mind as a potential option for their odd rotation. That’s what it takes to make any angular momentum.) Bob Cook Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2020 8:32 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride Jurg— Four questions that come to mind are: * What is the distance in 3-D space between the D*-D* centers needed to start a common rotation of their respective flux rotations? * What matching is necessary of angular alignment of the axes of the respective flux rotation toruses, if any, to allow the common rotation and transition to a He* with the creation of new free space? * And does the new space volume (in 3-D) have any local time associated with flux rotation frequency or is there no local frequency of magnetic flux—i.e., no flux in the new space once the photon leaves the new space? * Is there any specific volume in 3-D associated with the new space? These questions may be good to consider at the workshop. Bob From: Jürg Wyttenbach<mailto:ju...@datamart.ch> Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 2:42 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the lattice. The restriction for Mills/hydrino like condensation is given by the symmetry of the fields and space. Orbits with same mass and topology can condensate what means start a common rotation what classically frees space-time what is equivalent to releasing energy. As said: In the Holmlid case we see such orbit pairing going downhill from 8 H* --> 2 4-He (8-Be) with a proton finally taking over the excess energy. This has nothing in common with Mills model as there always must be a final state with a higher stability/density = number of flux rotations. There is just one more rotation possible for one symmetric mass pair and thus there is only one H*-H* state fora a pair of protons where as D*-D* can have 4 bonds. Consequently the next H*-H* condensation only works if you have 2 H*-H* and does not work not for a single pair. This is what Mills missed. J.W. Am 07.02.20 um 16:54 schrieb bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>: Fran— You seem to imply that nature changes depending on your observation position—at the center of a local hydrogen at 3rd base of a lattice nuclet or far away in the batter’s box. Is my inference correct? Also you suggest more than one temporal (time) direction. This suggests 3 or maybe 6 possible time directions relative to 3rd base—up, down, back front left or right. Can you explain temporal direction in more detail? Is there no global time that applies to all points in space, once that point is created? Bob Cook From: Roarty, Francis X<mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2020 10:37 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride Hi Jones, I still suspect Casimir geometry is actually relativistic and the math they are using is giving the dimensions from local hydrogen perspective while from our perspective the hydrogen inside the hydride dilates becoming both faster and “relatively” smaller, packing out further and further on the temporal axis while simultaneously getting harder and harder to detect from the macro world. I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the lattice. Fran From: Jones Beene <mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2020 9:19 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride I was hoping that this new discovery would show much tighter hydrogen spa
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
Jurg— Four questions that come to mind are: * What is the distance in 3-D space between the D*-D* centers needed to start a common rotation of their respective flux rotations? * What matching is necessary of angular alignment of the axes of the respective flux rotation toruses, if any, to allow the common rotation and transition to a He* with the creation of new free space? * And does the new space volume (in 3-D) have any local time associated with flux rotation frequency or is there no local frequency of magnetic flux—i.e., no flux in the new space once the photon leaves the new space? * Is there any specific volume in 3-D associated with the new space? These questions may be good to consider at the workshop. Bob From: Jürg Wyttenbach<mailto:ju...@datamart.ch> Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 2:42 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the lattice. The restriction for Mills/hydrino like condensation is given by the symmetry of the fields and space. Orbits with same mass and topology can condensate what means start a common rotation what classically frees space-time what is equivalent to releasing energy. As said: In the Holmlid case we see such orbit pairing going downhill from 8 H* --> 2 4-He (8-Be) with a proton finally taking over the excess energy. This has nothing in common with Mills model as there always must be a final state with a higher stability/density = number of flux rotations. There is just one more rotation possible for one symmetric mass pair and thus there is only one H*-H* state fora a pair of protons where as D*-D* can have 4 bonds. Consequently the next H*-H* condensation only works if you have 2 H*-H* and does not work not for a single pair. This is what Mills missed. J.W. Am 07.02.20 um 16:54 schrieb bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>: Fran— You seem to imply that nature changes depending on your observation position—at the center of a local hydrogen at 3rd base of a lattice nuclet or far away in the batter’s box. Is my inference correct? Also you suggest more than one temporal (time) direction. This suggests 3 or maybe 6 possible time directions relative to 3rd base—up, down, back front left or right. Can you explain temporal direction in more detail? Is there no global time that applies to all points in space, once that point is created? Bob Cook From: Roarty, Francis X<mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2020 10:37 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride Hi Jones, I still suspect Casimir geometry is actually relativistic and the math they are using is giving the dimensions from local hydrogen perspective while from our perspective the hydrogen inside the hydride dilates becoming both faster and “relatively” smaller, packing out further and further on the temporal axis while simultaneously getting harder and harder to detect from the macro world. I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the lattice. Fran From: Jones Beene <mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2020 9:19 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride I was hoping that this new discovery would show much tighter hydrogen spacing - in keeping with the various theories for dense hydrogen. However, the spacing is far from pico and not extremely compact at all, and therefore this may result may not be related to LENR. Fortunately, there is a lot of work going on in superhydrides - and this work aligns with the long-held suspicion that a transient form of superconductivity at greater than room temperature - and the occurrence of LENR are somehow related. Here is a related paper on another superhydride with a massive 9:1 atomic ratio. Ratios of nine or ten to one are possible with high pressure. https://phys.org/news/2019-10-impossible-superconductor.html It is only a matter of time until a breakthrough occurs in this field and the extreme pressures now being used, become superfluous. Terry Blanton wrote: An international team of researchers has discovered the hydrogen atoms in a metal hydride materi
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the lattice. The restriction for Mills/hydrino like condensation is given by the symmetry of the fields and space. Orbits with same mass and topology can condensate what means start a common rotation what classically frees space-time what is equivalent to releasing energy. As said: In the Holmlid case we see such orbit pairing going downhill from 8 H* --> 2 4-He (8-Be) with a proton finally taking over the excess energy. This has nothing in common with Mills model as there always must be a final state with a higher stability/density = number of flux rotations. There is just one more rotation possible for one symmetric mass pair and thus there is only one H*-H* state fora a pair of protons where as D*-D* can have 4 bonds. Consequently the next H*-H* condensation only works if you have 2 H*-H* and does not work not for a single pair. This is what Mills missed. J.W. Am 07.02.20 um 16:54 schrieb bobcook39...@hotmail.com: Fran— You seem to imply that nature changes depending on your observation position—at the center of a local hydrogen at 3^rd base of a lattice nuclet or far away in the batter’s box. Is my inference correct? Also you suggest more than one temporal (time) direction. This suggests 3 or maybe 6 possible time directions relative to 3^rd base—up, down, back front left or right. Can you explain temporal direction in more detail? Is there _no_ global time that applies to all points in space, once that point is created? Bob Cook *From: *Roarty, Francis X <mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> *Sent: *Thursday, February 6, 2020 10:37 PM *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> *Subject: *RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride Hi Jones, I still suspect Casimir geometry is actually relativistic and the math they are using is giving the dimensions from local hydrogen perspective while from our perspective the hydrogen inside the hydride dilates becoming both faster and “relatively” smaller, packing out further and further on the temporal axis while simultaneously getting harder and harder to detect from the macro world. I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the lattice. Fran *From:* Jones Beene *Sent:* Tuesday, February 04, 2020 9:19 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride I was hoping that this new discovery would show much tighter hydrogen spacing - in keeping with the various theories for dense hydrogen. However, the spacing is far from pico and not extremely compact at all, and therefore this may result may not be related to LENR. Fortunately, there is a lot of work going on in superhydrides - and this work aligns with the long-held suspicion that a transient form of superconductivity at greater than room temperature - and the occurrence of LENR are somehow related. Here is a related paper on another superhydride with a massive 9:1 atomic ratio. Ratios of nine or ten to one are possible with high pressure. https://phys.org/news/2019-10-impossible-superconductor.html It is only a matter of time until a breakthrough occurs in this field and the extreme pressures now being used, become superfluous. Terry Blanton wrote: */An international team of researchers has discovered the hydrogen atoms in a metal hydride material are much more tightly spaced than had been predicted for decades — a feature that could possibly facilitate superconductivity at or near room temperature and pressure./* https://scitechdaily.com/room-temperature-superconductor-breakthrough-at-oak-ridge-national-laboratory/ -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr.22 8910 Affoltern a.A. 044 760 14 18 079 246 36 06
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
Fran— You seem to imply that nature changes depending on your observation position—at the center of a local hydrogen at 3rd base of a lattice nuclet or far away in the batter’s box. Is my inference correct? Also you suggest more than one temporal (time) direction. This suggests 3 or maybe 6 possible time directions relative to 3rd base—up, down, back front left or right. Can you explain temporal direction in more detail? Is there no global time that applies to all points in space, once that point is created? Bob Cook From: Roarty, Francis X<mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2020 10:37 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride Hi Jones, I still suspect Casimir geometry is actually relativistic and the math they are using is giving the dimensions from local hydrogen perspective while from our perspective the hydrogen inside the hydride dilates becoming both faster and “relatively” smaller, packing out further and further on the temporal axis while simultaneously getting harder and harder to detect from the macro world. I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the lattice. Fran From: Jones Beene Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2020 9:19 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride I was hoping that this new discovery would show much tighter hydrogen spacing - in keeping with the various theories for dense hydrogen. However, the spacing is far from pico and not extremely compact at all, and therefore this may result may not be related to LENR. Fortunately, there is a lot of work going on in superhydrides - and this work aligns with the long-held suspicion that a transient form of superconductivity at greater than room temperature - and the occurrence of LENR are somehow related. Here is a related paper on another superhydride with a massive 9:1 atomic ratio. Ratios of nine or ten to one are possible with high pressure. https://phys.org/news/2019-10-impossible-superconductor.html It is only a matter of time until a breakthrough occurs in this field and the extreme pressures now being used, become superfluous. Terry Blanton wrote: An international team of researchers has discovered the hydrogen atoms in a metal hydride material are much more tightly spaced than had been predicted for decades — a feature that could possibly facilitate superconductivity at or near room temperature and pressure. https://scitechdaily.com/room-temperature-superconductor-breakthrough-at-oak-ridge-national-laboratory/
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride
Hi Jones, I still suspect Casimir geometry is actually relativistic and the math they are using is giving the dimensions from local hydrogen perspective while from our perspective the hydrogen inside the hydride dilates becoming both faster and “relatively” smaller, packing out further and further on the temporal axis while simultaneously getting harder and harder to detect from the macro world. I think Mills was accurate about self catalyzing of fractional hydrogen when trapped in a lattice, like cheerleaders forming a pyramid with the lattice as just the ground floor I suspect they can dilate out from the 3d base structure of the metal lattice and form blankets of fractional hydrogen in either temporal direction from the lattice. Fran From: Jones Beene Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2020 9:19 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Superconducting Metal Hydride I was hoping that this new discovery would show much tighter hydrogen spacing - in keeping with the various theories for dense hydrogen. However, the spacing is far from pico and not extremely compact at all, and therefore this may result may not be related to LENR. Fortunately, there is a lot of work going on in superhydrides - and this work aligns with the long-held suspicion that a transient form of superconductivity at greater than room temperature - and the occurrence of LENR are somehow related. Here is a related paper on another superhydride with a massive 9:1 atomic ratio. Ratios of nine or ten to one are possible with high pressure. https://phys.org/news/2019-10-impossible-superconductor.html It is only a matter of time until a breakthrough occurs in this field and the extreme pressures now being used, become superfluous. Terry Blanton wrote: An international team of researchers has discovered the hydrogen atoms in a metal hydride material are much more tightly spaced than had been predicted for decades — a feature that could possibly facilitate superconductivity at or near room temperature and pressure. https://scitechdaily.com/room-temperature-superconductor-breakthrough-at-oak-ridge-national-laboratory/
