Re: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way
I think we are going to find that LENR, which I think is a form of Dark Energy is really caused from the inflation of Dark Matter which, like you say is a DDL form of hydrogen making up the fabric of space. I think LENR happens all of the time in our atmosphere and is the energy behind our weather, like I have said before. Hot Cold does not explain the megatons of energy released from our atmosphere. Stewart On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Lewan Mats *http://phys.org/news/2015-02-presence-dark-milky.html* http://phys.org/news/2015-02-presence-dark-milky.html This story very likely relates to the Rossi/Parkhomov results (which probably explains why Mats posted it). Although cosmologists do not know the composition of dark matter... We know that dark matter is needed in our Galaxy to keep the stars and gas rotating at their observed speedsHowever, we still do not know what dark matter is composed of. This is one of the most important science questions of our times... yet, all of us appreciated that over 90% of the ”light matter” - that which is visible - is hydrogen. Therefore, a logical conclusion is that dark matter is most likely a degernate from of light matter, meaning that it is mostly hydrogen in an different and denser form. The controlled conversion of LM to DM (light matter to dark matter, or hydrogen to DDL) is the prime candidate for the power source behind LENR, since there is no high energy radiation from the reaction - and since slight transmutation which is seen – is entirely* incidental* and a side effect which is thousands of times too low to supply the excess heat seen. Jones
RE: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way
From: Jones Beene Oops typo. should be: Therefore, a logical conclusion is that dark matter is most likely a degenerate from of light matter, meaning that it is mostly hydrogen in a different and denser form. BTW - This would be the same species as seen in the many Holmlid/Miley papers, which is called IRH or inverted Rydberg hydrogen. Holmlid: A much denser state exists for hydrogen ... and the bond distance is very small, equal to 2.3 pm. Its density is extremely large 130 kg / cm3 here is one paper: http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/244/3/032036/pdf/1742-6596_244_3_032036
RE: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way
From: Lewan Mats http://phys.org/news/2015-02-presence-dark-milky.html This story very likely relates to the Rossi/Parkhomov results (which probably explains why Mats posted it). Although cosmologists do not know the composition of dark matter... We know that dark matter is needed in our Galaxy to keep the stars and gas rotating at their observed speedsHowever, we still do not know what dark matter is composed of. This is one of the most important science questions of our times... yet, all of us appreciated that over 90% of the light matter - that which is visible - is hydrogen. Therefore, a logical conclusion is that dark matter is most likely a degernate from of light matter, meaning that it is mostly hydrogen in an different and denser form. The controlled conversion of LM to DM (light matter to dark matter, or hydrogen to DDL) is the prime candidate for the power source behind LENR, since there is no high energy radiation from the reaction - and since slight transmutation which is seen - is entirely incidental and a side effect which is thousands of times too low to supply the excess heat seen. Jones
RE: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way
From Jones: Oops typo. should be: Therefore, a logical conclusion is that dark matter is most likely a degenerate from of light matter, meaning that it is mostly hydrogen in a different and denser form. BTW - This would be the same species as seen in the many Holmlid/Miley papers, which is called IRH or inverted Rydberg hydrogen. Holmlid: A much denser state exists for hydrogen ... and the bond distance is very small, equal to 2.3 pm. Its density is extremely large 130 kg / cm3 here is one paper: http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/244/3/032036/pdf/1742-6596_244_3_032036 From my layman's POV these explanations sound VERY similar to Dr. Mills' hydrino model which allegedly consists of smaller more sense hydrogen atoms that apparently exist in great abundance below the officially accepted ground state. Can someone lay out some of the basic differences that might exist between the Rydberg hydrogen model vs Dr. Mills' hydrino model? Feel free to clarify any misinterpretations I may have made in my previous wording. It might be a good idea to point out what the most significant theoretical difference might be between competing models of Dark Matter that apparently involve the hydrogen atom. I'm curious. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way
Contrary to popular belief, Mills was not the first to suggest the fractional hydrogen state, even if many of his supporters want to give him that status. Dr. Robert Carroll predicted fractional quantum states of hydrogen in 1976 in a published book: The Eternity Equation, and there were others. An inventor named Arie de Geus (now deceased) patented an energy production method that involved creating fractional hydrogen from lithium as the prime reactant at a time when Mills had never published any experiment with lithium. Piantelli beat Mills to publication with nickel-hydrogen. And so on. Mills did go well beyond Carroll on fleshing out the theory, but RM did not discover the fractional state. Moreover, a graduate student of Carroll predicted the 137 inverse quantum levels, also claimed by Mills - but the history of alpha WRT Schrödinger goes back many years. http://www.cce.ufes.br/jair/mq2grad/ArchHistExactSci395_Kragh_Magic_Number_P artial_History_Fine_Structure_Constant.pdf In short, Mills has plenty of competition in the fractional hydrogen arena as to authorship of a workable theory and unfortunately - he appears to be lost-in-space with regards to useful applications even if his is the name most associated with the theory. In short, Mills had a golden opportunity but seems to have blown it - and most of that can be traced to a stubborn rejection of quantum mechanics and LENR. Of course, the Sun-Cell could salvage everything, if it is real - but isnt BLP already overdue on that? From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent From Jones: Oops typo should be: Therefore, a logical conclusion is that dark matter is most likely a degenerate from of light matter, meaning that it is mostly hydrogen in a different and denser form. BTW - This would be the same species as seen in the many Holmlid/Miley papers, which is called IRH or inverted Rydberg hydrogen. Holmlid: A much denser state exists for hydrogen ... and the bond distance is very small, equal to 2.3 pm. Its density is extremely large 130 kg / cm3 here is one paper: http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/244/3/032036/pdf/1742-6596_244_3_032036 From my layman's POV these explanations sound VERY similar to Dr. Mills' hydrino model which allegedly consists of smaller more sense hydrogen atoms that apparently exist in great abundance below the officially accepted ground state. Can someone lay out some of the basic differences that might exist between the Rydberg hydrogen model vs Dr. Mills' hydrino model? Feel free to clarify any misinterpretations I may have made in my previous wording. It might be a good idea to point out what the most significant theoretical difference might be between competing models of Dark Matter that apparently involve the hydrogen atom. I'm curious. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-presence-dark-milky.html Mats www.animpossibleinvention.comhttp://www.animpossibleinvention.com
Re: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html When the geometry of General relativity is changed to reflect quantum mechanics, the rework predicts a universe without a big bang. But more importantly, the integration of quantum mechanics into general relativity predicts that the cosmological constant that the universe was formed under is based on the predominance of a very light and almost massless particle in order to meet the requirements of the current universe. See http://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.3093v3.pdf *(i) the smallness of #, about 10−123 in Planck units (‘thesmallness problem’),(ii) the approximate equality of vacuum and matter densityin the current epoch (‘the coincidence problem’),(iii) the apparent extreme fine-tuning required in the earlyuniverse, to have a spatially flat universe in the currentepoch (‘the flatness problem’),(iv) the true nature of dark matter, and(v) the beginning of our universe, or the so-called big bang.* Also snip *In summary, we have shown here that as for the QRE,the second order Friedmann equation derived from theQRE also contains two quantum correction terms. Theseterms are generic and unavoidable and follow naturallyin a quantum mechanical description of our universe. Ofthese, the first can be interpreted as cosmological constant or dark energy of the correct (observed) magnitude and a small mass of the graviton (or axion). The second quantum correction term pushes back the time singularity indefinitely, and predicts an everlasting universe.* *While inhomogeneous or anisotropic perturbations arenot expected to significantly affect these results, it wouldbe useful to redo the current study with such small perturbations to rigorously confirm that this is indeed thecase. * *Also, as noted in the introduction, we assume it tofollow general relativity, whereas the Einstein equationsmay themselves undergo quantum corrections, especiallyat early epochs, further affecting predictions. Given therobust set of starting assumptions, we expect our mainresults to continue to hold even if and when a fully satisfactory theory of quantum gravity is formulated. For the **cosmological constant problem at late times on the other hand, quantum gravity effects are practically absent and can be safely ignored. We hope to report on these and related issues elsewhere.* We know that light and matter can combine to form the almost massless polariton which could be the particle that is shaping the universe. Particle physics is hoping the supersymmetry(SUSY) will solve the cosmological constant problem and save the Standard Model of particle physics. That theory says that for every fermion the exists, there exists a boson force carrier. The CERN guys are looking for these particles at the LHC. I say that we LENR people know that light can combine with each type of fermion to produce a boson. The polariton is one example where an electron and a proton become bosons. So it is LENR that can produce SUSY in its own very special way. As proposed in the SUSY theory, these LENR based SUSY bosons form to combine the forces of nature: EMF, Weak, and Strong to give us one single LENR force that produces nuclear effects. Remember that a BEC needs bosons to form. I say that this boson is the Polariton.
RE: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way
Thanks for the history lesson on the provenance of fractional quantum states, Jones. I was not aware of the fact there had been so many prior BLP interpretations involving fractional states of the Hydrogen atom. Should Mills be so lucky as to collect a Nobel prize he may need to share it with many prior developers and experimentalists. As for the future (or demise) of BLP's promised SunCell technology. Out on the SCP web site I have repeatedly made it very clear that, IMHO, it's likely going to take BLP a lot longer to develop a COMMERCIALLY viable prototype. Producing a less stringent experimental prototype whose sole purpose would be to do nothing more than prove the fact that SunCell devices can self-run and generate excess electricity would have been a better option. I recall getting some flak from a Mills minion, who apparently thought I was haranguing the good Doctor, but that doesn't bother me that much. An experimental prototype doesn't have to run long to make its point. The Wright's brother's first self-powered flight lasted a mere 12 seconds before grounding itself. (Jed can correct me if I error on that point.) Mills has stated for the record that there isn't all much of a difference between developing a commercial prototype versus an experimental prototype. I disagree, and I have said so out on SCP. Apparently so have others within the Vort Collective. At present I think it is way too early to suggest SunCell technology is an apparent failure. IMHO, BLP's contracted engineering firms are barely out of the start gate. I suspect they also purposely low-balled their original estimates just to get their foot in the door. It's also possible they simply underestimated how much more RD effort would be needed. That wouldn't be the first time that has happened. It's going to take time. It's as simple as that. Perhaps another year or two before I'll start getting twitchy. Personally, I would not be surprised if BLP eventually acquiesces and presents an experimental prototype in about a year from now. Then, they may be ready to embark on an commercial prototype. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way
An interesting idea that I recently pursued might offer some insight into this discussion. A few weeks ago I spoke of my thoughts that the mass of an electron might be distributed throughout the field in the form of field energy. This would be established by using Einstein's equation that E=M*C^2 at each differential volume of space. It is well understood in classical fields theory that energy is contained at every location where an electric field is present. I took the equation for the volume of a sphere and obtained a differential model only depending upon radius since the field is symmetrical in the other spherical angular dimensions. This formula was then multiplied by the volume energy density found in the wikipedia(I know...) to obtain a total differential energy density per volume element that could then be integrated over the entire volume rather easily. The results of the integration showed that all of the mass of an electron could be distributed within an electric field that existed from a radius of 2.8179 fm to infinity. This also is described within the wikipedia article on electrons as the classical electron radius. In their case, the energy was determined by assuming that you forced the charge into that volume instead of from my perspective. I found it interesting that both approaches yeilded the same result. They also pointed out that the assumed radius of a proton is .8775 fm which is about 1/3 the radius of the classical electron. I have been seeking an explanation as to why a field has an immediate impact upon the momentum of a charged body entering into that region when it takes significant time for the particle originating that field to become aware of the new intruder. If as I suspect, the field contains local mass then the question would be answered in a reasonable manner. IIRC quantum mechanics assumes that a photon or many of them act as the carrier of this momentum exchange between the two particles. When the particles are far removed it is difficult to understand how this contact is so well directed by that method. I find it easier to believe that a local reaction can handle the momentum and energy balances instead. That was what initiated my search and is now placed on hold. Consider this input as just an alternate way of looking at an unusual problem. Dave -Original Message- From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 10, 2015 11:35 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:New study confirms the presence of dark matter in the inner part of the Milky Way FromJones: Oops typo… should be: ”Therefore, a logical conclusion isthat dark matter is most likely a degenerate from of light matter, meaning that it is mostly hydrogen in a different and denser form.” BTW - This would be the same species as seen in the many Holmlid/Miley papers, which is called ”IRH” or inverted Rydberg hydrogen. Holmlid: ”A much denser state exists for hydrogen ... and the bonddistance is very small, equal to 2.3 pm. Its density is extremely large 130 kg /cm3” here is one paper: http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/244/3/032036/pdf/1742-6596_244_3_032036 Frommy layman's POV these explanations sound VERY similar to Dr. Mills' hydrino modelwhich allegedly consists of smaller more sense hydrogen atoms that apparentlyexist in great abundance below the officially accepted ground state. Cansomeone lay out some of the basic differences that might exist between the Rydberghydrogen model vs Dr. Mills' hydrino model? Feel free to clarify any misinterpretationsI may have made in my previous wording. Itmight be a good idea to point out what the most significant theoretical differencemight be between competing models of Dark Matter that apparently involve thehydrogen atom. I'mcurious. Regards, StevenVincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
