Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:52:53
-0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Don't you believe in Hy-hydrides, or that they may bind to
positive ions?
I have a hard time, Robin, understanding how a chemical bond can form
with a Hy. The electrons are in energy states that are far removed from
the states in normal atoms and the states are not compatible in a
quantum sense. Normal chemistry recognizes three types of bonds, which
are ionic, covalent and metallic. Each requires the electron be removed
from the atom for some length of time. This time is longest for ionic
bonds and shortest for a metallic bond. How long can the electron
associated with a Hy be located elsewhere?
0.
How does this loss happen
without the energy lost during formation of a Hy being returned to the
electron?
The loss doesn't happen at all. On the contrary it's the other ion
that suffers the loss, the hydrino "suffers" a gain. The
hydrinohydride is the negative ion. It can form ionic bonds with
positive ions of other atoms. When forming a coating on a metal,
think of it as a substitute for O--, and the layer formed as
analogous to an oxide layer.
OK, you propose that two or more electrons occupy fractional quantum
levels at the same proton. Presumably the same kind of limitations exist
here as in normal quantum levels, i.e. no two electrons can occupy the
same quantum level. These electrons can not leave the proton to
interact with other atoms but their charge is "felt" by positive ions
with which an ionic compound is formed. Is this what you have in mind?
I expect you would also conclude that such compounds are very good
insulators and would interact chemically only with material in which
ions are present. In other words, no metallic or covalent interaction
would be possible.
Regards,
Ed
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/
Competition provides the motivation,
Cooperation provides the means.
