Poser: does the bare proton: H- (hydrogen cation) aka "nascent hydrogen" possess anomalous chemical energy, and is that energy related to why is it neutralized so quickly?
With the Rossi report coming up soon (we hope) and the likelihood that it will show "apparent" gain above chemical, but without gamma radiation or other indicia of a nuclear reaction, we need to more closely examine the magnitude of the "real" chemical energy available from hydrogen manipulation. It is not as clear-cut as you think, at least not when using water as the physical model for hydrogen redox reactions. The following presents the case for an apparent and "natural" COP of around 2.4 (6.8 eV instead of 2.85) being consistent with the real upper limit of the chemical energy of nascent hydrogen neutralization via Ps. This is NOT a related explanation to the one Mills gives in his theory, but it may sound similar, since anything to do hydrogen (or positronium) involves Rydberg multiples. It is not a violation of conservation of energy, if one admits to the reality of the Dirac "sea". In the case of positronium, the binding energy is 6.8 eV. Mills' theory neglects the important role of positronium - and his view is tied to redundant hydrogen orbitals. However, the best explanation for the rapid (picosecond) neutralization of a free proton in nature is the ubiquity of the Dirac "sea" of (virtual) positronium. Here is another version of Dirac's field - epola, ps-BEC, ZPF or a host of other names for those who are intimidated by Hotson. http://www.epola.co.uk/introduction/precis/precis.htm Perhaps Rossi will demonstrate a robust version of this curiosity, one that has lurked in redox chemistry for decades going back to Langmuir's torch: which is the possibility that asymmetric gain will be available in special circumstances from sequential free proton formation and recombination. This gain is actually quite similar to chemical energy but higher and non-nuclear. In other words - there is a good argument that the "real" chemical energy of hydrogen manipulation can be about 2.4 times higher than it seems from combustion, due to an active vacuum and nascent hydrogen neutralization via disruption of the binding energy of Ps (which energy remains in 3-space as a UV photon). This argument will be continued in another post with more detail. Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
