Dear Friends,
I have just published:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/08/lenr-wants-to-grow-up.html
a new paper in the series-why technology first?
it is about prediction and history but it will not make history; if you
read it, you will easily realize why- it tries to break 3 potent, cruel
Stewart,
I think part of the confusion is the way we consider time and gravity at a
macro scale with an isotropy where time is constant in an inertial frame and
gravity only changes at the square of distance, gravity has a constant / slow
to change spatial vector at macro scale while at a nano
Should have added this.
In the Naudts paper often quoted by Fran Roarty, the author shows that one
can make a good argument in favor of a deep fractional ground state: which
we can call f/H (the hydrino-state is trademarked) using only the standard
theory of relativistic quantum mechanics. Mills
I can see where you are coming from, which implies nature operates off
a vacuum at her most basic level, which I agree with.
For me the question is how much energy is pumped into that vacuum and
is it isotropic and smooth or actually forming strings and
multidimensional branes depending upon how
Jones, Do you have a reference for Naudts' paper? It would be interesting
to get Yeong Kim's take on this. Some time ago, he published a paper
refuting the existence of any stable f/H state.
Eigenvectors, in a linear system, are a complete basis for
expansion/description of any driven solution
http://www.projectworldawareness.com/2010/10/terrifying-scientific-discovery-strange-emissions-by-sun-are-suddenly-mutating-matter/
I believe that the variability of nuclear decay rates is the driving
principle behind LENR. This decay rate variability is showing up through a
strange correlation
Axil, I agree with your statement [snip] Variability of nuclear decay rates
is caused my magnetism. This ability for magnetism to affect nuclear processes
is the driving force behind LENR.” [/snip]. I like that you said “variability”
which encompasses both extended and shortened half lives of
From: Bob Higgins
Do you have a reference for Naudts' paper?
http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0507193v2.pdf
It would be interesting to get Yeong Kim's take on this. Some time ago, he
published a paper refuting the existence of any stable f/H state.
It would also be interesting to get
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_electromagnetism_and_special_relativity
Magnetism is an emergent property of charge. Magnetism is a mechanism that
projects charge from one relativistic reference frame to another to
equalize causality between frames. Magnetism is a method to focus and
I agree that magnetic fields can increase decay rates and I believe they
can also originate from the vacuum (as well as magnetrons and klystrons and
rotating equipment, etc.
Which calls into question the sanity of pulsing/transmitting a
couple billion watts of electromagnetic radiation overhead
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_electromagnetism
Though Coulomb's law expresses action at a distance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_at_a_distance_(physics), it is an
easily understood *electric force* principle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TKSfAkWWN0
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014
From: Bob Higgins
However, my understanding (and my differential equations study is many years
old) is that with the addition of special relativity effects, the system is no
longer linear. Thus, the eigenstates can no longer be used as a complete
orthogonal basis for the general solution.
How does Mills know that what he is seeing in his experiments are
electrons. They might be muons that obit at very low orbitals.
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
*From:* Bob Higgins
However, my understanding (and my differential equations study is
Does this mean my aliens farting through a wormhole theory is off the
table?
On Wednesday, August 13, 2014, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
*From:* Bob Higgins
However, my understanding (and my differential equations study is many
years old) is that with the addition of special
Yes, I know about this, but this is only for the deep state, and also this
state seam to be attributed to the use of essentially the wave operator
that in part is included in klein gordon and mills theory. I have also seen
papers that have looked at what happens when the proton is model as
a non
*Of course, that same lack of QM expertise could be said about most of the
regular posters on this forum (myself for sure – but there could be a
lurker or two who is highly qualified, perhaps yourself) but the difference
is that we did not take in $120 million over the years, based on a series
of
Hello Peter,
I think your analysis are absolute spot on. Although as I want things to be
positive rather than negative I was searching for a way to express myself
in a way that the same meaning appeared. Well, I did not succeed very well.
However, in that search it struck me that there is one
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 13 Aug 2014 07:11:56 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Should have added this.
In the Naudts paper often quoted by Fran Roarty, the author shows that one
can make a good argument in favor of a deep fractional ground state: which
we can call f/H (the hydrino-state is
Where does the spin of the electron come from?
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 5:13 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 13 Aug 2014 07:11:56 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Should have added this.
In the Naudts paper often quoted by Fran Roarty, the author shows that one
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:02:22 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
However, this deep orbital is only a few Fermi in distance from the nucleus.
The electron is relativistic and heavy when it gets there. Coincidentally, the
strong force it is 137 times stronger than
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Wed, 13 Aug 2014 17:35:46 -0400:
Hi,
Where does the spin of the electron come from?
Two different forms of angular momentum. Think of an elliptical orbital. The
motion of the electron around the perimeter represents the spin, (s quantum
number), rotary motion
That's a pretty good theory, Jones. It upholds many aspects of
Occham's Razor. No ZPE, not too much of Mills where he goes off into
the weeds, coincidental dark matter 3.7keV gain.
Now, if we align up these electrons in such a way that they interact
with others like themselves in a 1D chain,
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 6:05 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
However neither exist when an electron is freed from an atom, hence free
electrons have no spin, and thus spin is not an intrinsic property of the
electron.
Further, if the orbital electron gives up all spin momentum, it might not
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 2:48 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
Why wouldn't the extra energy be lost again when the electron eventually
returns
to a higher orbital? (Since it would have to escape the strong force
again.)
Electrons don't feel the strong force. (Although are affected by Coulomb
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Further, if the orbital electron gives up all spin momentum, it might not
be freed but cease to exist entirely!
Then we have a charge conservation problem on our hands.
Eric
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 3:05 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
However neither exist when an electron is freed from an atom, hence free
electrons have no spin, and thus spin is not an intrinsic property of the
electron. Prove me wrong! (please!) ;)
If we say that the s quantum number (aka
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
BTW – it has been mentioned here before, that one way to overcome some of
the objections to f/H is to view the reduced ground state as transitory,
with a short but nontrivial lifetime, and with inherent asymmetry between
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
However, this deep [f/H] orbital is only a few Fermi in distance from the
nucleus. The electron is relativistic and heavy when it gets there.
It's interesting to note that the nuclear radius is not all that special
with
Eric--
What is the frame of reference that the electron is relativistic in? Does such
a hypothesis consider that the rotation of the pertinent frame of reference is
nill. What would be the effect of a spinning frame circulating in the same
direction as the electron’s circulation? Would
29 matches
Mail list logo
