Does anyone have a good email contact for Stubbs? The one listed in the Stubbs pdf paper does not go through.
Bob Cook Sent from Windows Mail From: Bob Cook Sent: Saturday, March 5, 2016 10:58 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Russ-- The Stubbs’s theory sounds a lot like the theory of Philippe Hatt presented at the ICCF-19 conference. Hatt’s theory predicts the physical parameters of the proton, neutron quite accurately compared to anything else I know of . Stubbs and Hatt should get together. Bob Cook Sent from Windows Mail From: russ.geo...@gmail.com Sent: Friday, March 4, 2016 10:32 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Holy Muon Batman this is one staggering paper… From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, March 4, 2016 10:08 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:RE: High Harmoinc Generation in the glow-tube reactor If the plot of the radiation spectrum from a glow-tube reactor encased in lead- turns out to be typical of bremsstrahlung of high speed electrons, instead of gamma radiation, the following is presented as an interpretation. “An Alternative to the Quark-Gluon Structure of the Proton” by William L. Stubbs – which can explain, or partially explain, Holmlid’s mysterious muon results. http://vixra.org/abs/1511.0191 Stubbs presents a new model of the proton by reanalyzing the SLAC proton and deuteron F2 curves. He shows that the proton can be modeled accurately as nine muons. [IMO - since this is quantum mechanical, there could be two valid views both of which are correct, depending on circumstances]. Stubbs concludes that the deep inelastic scattering data supports a simpler model of the proton than the standard quark-gluon model, at least for explaining certain phenomena of proton disintegration. To counter one objection: it is well known that muons and antimuons are completely stable together below a threshold of acceleration, just like the quark and antiquark coexist in every nucleus of matter. Antimuons operate to provide the same functionality as gluons. Holmlid’s detection of high levels of muons some distance from his reactor may provide experimental evidence of such a situation. BTW in muon decay, the electron is extremely fast and expected to have a steep peak at 52 MeV which would provide massive bremsstrahlung in a lead target, even (especially) in the situation of little or no excess heat seen in the reactor itself. _____________________________________________ … The important part of the Hagelstein slides is for assessing what could be happening in the glow-tube reactor, IF high energy radiation is seen in the range of 2.7 MeV... this is an apparent target “signature” to look for, at least when deuterium is the fuel (it would be a much different signature for protium). If this signature should show itself in glow tube testing, it would be a huge advancement in understanding… even if the counts are low (they are expected to be low).
