I think the argument being offered is that because the Rydberg matter has such large diameter electron orbitals, there is a high magnetic moment for these materials. When one ~2D hexagonal Rydberg "snowflake" is put atop another, the magnetic moments align like two disk magnets oriented N-S-N-S.
Since in this case we are talking about H or D Rydberg snowflakes, I think the electrons are all in large planar Rydberg orbitals and this hexagonal Rydberg snowflake would behave as a BEC. Because of that, if one of the electrons were forced to take a different orbital, it may completely disrupt the cluster. So I have been thinking about ways that the small separation could occur that could work across an entire snowflake all at once. I have mentally postulated that as more and more "snowflakes" align and stack, perhaps the magnetic moment forces along the axis of the aligned atoms squeeze the layers together, just as 3 magnet disks stacked will produce a greater axial field than 2 magnet disks. In the case of disk magnets, as the number in the stack increases, at some point the axial field will not continue to increase - because of the high permeability of the magnetic material, the field will leak out the sides. It could be that these highly anisotropic Rydberg snowflakes may not suffer that effect and the axial magnetic field may continue to increase for a large number of stacked layers. Also, in that same vein... if one of the electrons in a Rydberg cluster (presume BEC) were excited out of the Rydberg state (ionized) perhaps by a photon interaction, the whole snowflake could self-destruct. If it were an inner layer for a large stack of snowflakes that self-destructed, you could have the effect of the magnetic field of many stacked snowflakes acting on the particles - sort of a magnetic explosion. In that case, it may be possible that a particle could receive magnetic accelerations from many layers at once - a large number of atoms in the stack acting upon the few particles of the disintegrating inner layer that was ionized by the photon. In that case, the energy supplied may not represent Coulombic explosion, but instead an Oersted explosion with many particles acting on a few. Then the whole business of the 2.3 pm spacing, based solely on Coulombic explosion calculations, is pure poppycock. However, I do not understand Winterberg's postulate entirely and this magnetic theory of mine could be total crap. On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:54 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > In reply to Bob Higgins's message of Sun, 10 Jan 2016 10:51:47 -0700: > Hi, > > This message will only make sense if viewed with a fixed width font. > [snip] > >What Holmlid proposes is that planar hexagonal Rydberg clusters of > deuterium can form stacks where the inter-nucleus spacing in the stack can > be 2.3 pm. The hexagonal Rydberg clusters are essentially planar with an > inter-nucleus spacing that is bigger than D2 gas. So, in one dimension, > along the column of the stack, Holmlid claims that the inter-nucleus > spacing is 2.3 pm, while in the other 2 dimensions the inter-nucleus > spacing is 100x bigger. From a density standpoint, this would be a set of > linear strings. How do you ascribe density to something that is a linear > string? It would certainly be a tensor. > [snip] > I was going to write:- > > What makes me highly skeptical of the claim is that I see no way to get two > deuterons (or protons for that matter), within 2.3 pm of one another while > the > electrons are hundreds of pm away. > > ...when it occurred to me that the columns might interleave, such that the > electrons from one layer came between the nuclei from the layers above and > below. The spacing between layers would then be half of 2.3 pm. > > Imagine pushing two parallel "cylinders" into one another until the wall > of each > reached the axis of the other, with the layers of each "cylinder" > interleaving > with those of the other.) > > A1 A2 > E N E > E N E > E N E > E N E > E N E > E N E > > Each E N E layer is actually a single atom where the two E's represent a > single > electron in a circular orbit. N stands for nucleus. A1 is the axis of the > first > vertical cylinder. A2 is the axis of the second vertical cylinder. > > I wonder if coincidentally(?) the vertical separation distance is the fine > structure constant times the radius?? > > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >
