I think you are asking the correct questions. As I have come to read more about the RM and think about their behavior, I have come to respect Winterberg's concept to a greater degree.
The RM snowflakes have a high magnetic moment due to their large flat orbitals, and apparently the atoms in the RM snowflake align with all of their spins parallel to create a giant magnetic moment for the flake. It made me think of the neodymium iron disk magnets I have. These magnets really want to stack in a column. And, in a column, the magnetic moments add such that the column has a greater magnetic field running along its axis. In a previous comment I posited the possibility that if you had such a stack of atoms, could the ultra-dense state switch between D(1) and the D(-1)=D(0) state once the columns of flakes had formed? This is still a pretty big leap of faith because the atomic spacing of the D(1) flake is 150pm and the proposed D(-1)=D(0) state is 2.3pm (soley based upon Coulomb Explosion particle velocity measurements). Yes, it seems that Winterberg's columns of flakes could be detectable in rotational spectra - but at a much lower frequency than the already low frequency (50 MHz) for the individual RM flakes. This may show as a 1-30 MHz resonance in a shielded cavity containing such stacked flakes, with a resonance frequency dependent on the number of stacked flakes. However, while the individual RM flakes may remain scattered like a gas in a container (they are very low density), the same may not be true for the stacks of flakes. With their high magnetic moment and much higher mass / surface area, these stacks may want to collect on the walls - particularly if the walls are a magnetic material (like Ni or iron). Note that my stack of disk magnets really wants to stay stuck together and attached to my tool box. It is interesting to consider that inside a container with Ni particles that these stacks of RM flakes may want to attach themselves to the Ni surface. I think there is less chance of this being a factor in a Rossi hotCat/Parkhomov style reactor because the Ni particles are completely coated with LiH. However, in Rossi's original eCat, H2 gas was admitted to Ni particles mixed with some type of Fe catalyst. Could that catalyst have been an Fischer-Tropsch Fe2O3 based catalyst that caused formation of RM flakes that stacked and attached to the surface of his Ni powder particles like my disk magnet stack on my toolbox? On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 5:30 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Its very hard to see how a single flake can transform between a planar > atomic crystal state and ultra dense linear paired vortex. But perhaps > there is a mechanism based on energetic and state conservation effects. > > Assuming the effect is more classical and simple however could the switch > between planar and UDD form be explained by first having a stack of flakes > in the form of a nano wire?: > > Do we know how the Winterberg stack of Rydberg matter flakes forms. Does > he have a theory for this? Is it just a consequence of the planar nature of > the Rydberg matter it self or is there a kind of dipole magnetic effect > between the flakes that can cause the flakes to align and stack in this way > to form a Rydberg nanowire? > > I know I'm being very speculative here, but I wonder if a stack of Rydberg > matter flakes (h(1) or (d1)) each made up with of magnetically aligned > atoms, between the flakes, could under the right stimulation (such as a > strong magnetic field or SPP) switch to a bunch of columns of Ultra dense > matter (h(0) or (d0)) with each pair of atoms in the column coming from > adjacent flakes. For example if each flake had 50 or so atoms could a stack > of them switch to form 50 or maybe 25 Ultra dense vortexes. > > Perhaps this is too speculative I'm sure its possible to come up with any > number of ideas. I suppose we would first need evidence of the Winterberg > stack occurring before speculating on these lines. > > Would a Winterberg type stack have any observable signature such as > emission spectra etc? > >
