I would like to add the following: How can anyone seriously say that R.Mills is wrong and standard Quantum Mechanics is right if QM gives no explanation for the stability of the hydrogen atom, but only postulates it. Mills managed to do this very elegantly.
This shortcoming in the current atom model is so fundamental that it is really shocking to see that no theoretical physicist wants to look into it. I really tried to let them look into it. It was all in vain. They say that this problem was solved by Bohr many years ago so it cant be wrong and they dont want to look into it. The mistake in the current atomic model is based on the fact that the electron is described as a pointparticle with no dimensions. It leads to absurd consequences. Quantum physicists are very busy trying to explain the so called weird effect of the current QM theory and present even more absurd explanations for it. I can assure you that this attitude will be looked upon by future generations as being unbelievable but more probably it will be rediculed in the same way as we have witnessed in the past when other major paradygma shifts in science took place. Peter From: Eric Walker Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2015 11:06 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: QM rant On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <[email protected]> wrote: Did you read my last email? Rathke stated a critique, Mills answered it. Interesting PDF file. It has Mills as the author, and it talks about Mills in the third person. Looks like ghostwriting, but that's immaterial, I suppose. So you are dead wrong, it's the QM folks that are mute. You want to conclude from a rebuttal with Mills's name on it, probably written on his behalf, to a single critic of Mills, establishes that Mills does not stonewall criticism of his theory. Allow me to suggest this isolated counterexample does not prove what you want it to prove. Beyond this, let's agree to disagree about Mills. :) Eric
