This is an absurd request in light of Heisenberg and the 10*36 difference in
potentials. I think this topic may have had its origin on April 1.
From: H LV
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 1:18 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:No mass !?! Dirac
Thanks for finding out.
harry
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 3:16 PM, JonesBeene wrote:
> *From: *H LV
>
>
>
> A beam of electrons should bend downward in earths gravity. Has that ever
> been measured?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Experiments to determine the Force of Gravity on Single Electrons and
> Positrons
From: H LV
A beam of electrons should bend downward in earths gravity. Has that ever been
measured?
Experiments to determine the Force of Gravity on Single Electrons and Positrons
• FRED C. WITTEBORN
• & WILLIAM M. FAIRBANK
• Nature volume 220, pages 436–440 (02 November 1968)
My comment.
ohn Berry
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 30, 2018 3:54 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:No mass !?! Dirac electrons
>
> From the patent... "a free electron has inertial mass but not
> gravitational mass." and "Thus, a free electron is not gravitatio
The forces are different by 10*36, so comparisons are impossible to measure.
From: John Berry
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 3:54 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:No mass !?! Dirac electrons
>From the patent... "a free electron has inert
>From the patent... "a free electron has inertial mass but not gravitational
mass." and "Thus, a free electron is not gravitationally attracted to
ordinary matter. "
Really? Can that really add up?
Pretty sure this is not very much in agreement with conventional theory.
John Berry
On Tue, Ja
PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:No mass !?! Dirac electrons
NASA has funded antigravity resarch, but what is missing is any announcement of
big success.
Anyway, unified field theory research gets mostly ignored; started with
Boscovich (1758), how
NASA has funded antigravity resarch, but what is missing is any announcement of
big success.
Anyway, unified field theory research gets mostly ignored; started with
Boscovich (1758), how gravity is a residual of electricity from Boscovich
theory explained at:
Theoretical confirmation of the grav
Bob,
There is a fair amount of both brilliance (cough, cough) and silliness in Mills
hand-waving. His misidentification of the Higgs boson is in the later category.
As for the “antigravity electron” see his patent app (thanks to the spice man
for this)
Patent WO1995032021A1 - Apparatus and met
Jones—
For a nice qualitative summary of Mill’s theory see the following link:
http://www.brettholverstott.com/annoucements/2017/8/5/summary-of-randell-millss-unified-theory
Superconductivity of planar molecules (with electrons in a 2-D system ) are
discussed in item 12 of the summary.
Bob Coo
Speaking of loss of “gravitational mass” the electrons in graphene are called
massless.
One of the most controversial and defining properties is indeed an “apparent
loss of mass” which aside from semantics, is interesting for a number of
practical reasons in batteries and capacitors.
https:/
11 matches
Mail list logo
