At 09:42 am 13/01/2006 -0900, Horace wrote:
> I think there is a lot more energy to be gained from expansion of a > proton to a hydrogen atom, ... Interesting. 8-) Reminds me of the following question I dangled before the Society for Promoting Chr...errr..Classic Quantum Mechanics. I didn't get a bite - but then I didn't really expect to. <g> ======================================================= SCQM - A General Systems View ------------------------------------------------------- I don't know much about hydrinos - but what I do find very convincing is the idea of fractional entities. I find it convincing because it fits in with a general systems view of things. Any measurement of any kind must implicitly relate to a standard. In the case of a measurement which is integral then that standard is the integer 1. Integers like 4, 7, 11 what have you, are implicitly 4/1, 7/1 and 11/1. In other words there must be both an numerator and a denominator. The numerator appears above the surface - the denominator is hidden below the surface and most people are blissfully unaware of its existence. A simple illustrative narrative will show what I'm driving at. A miser has £100 in bank notes. Every night he counts them to make sure none have been stolen. Then he goes to sleep secure in the knowledge that he has counted up to 100 and all his notes are still there. The numerator is constant and he imagines this is all that matters. What he fails to realise is that every day the Government is printing more notes (as they usually do) and they are thereby stealing his money by increasing the denominator. He doesn't realise that the value of his notes is governed not only by the number he holds, which he can check, but also by the total number that there are in circulation, which he cannot check. Another example of denominator manipulation by Government is the use of British Standard Time and no doubt there are many others. The effect of denominator change appears to have been appreciated far more in politics than in science where there has been an uncritical faith in denominator constancy. The failure to appreciate the importance of the denominator part of a physical measurement is a crucial error in traditional physical theories. A similar error occurs in my own research field, viz. strength of materials, where stresses are viewed in terms of external conditions only and there is a failure to appreciate that stresses are the manifestation of differences between external and internal conditions and can be caused by either an alteration of external conditions only or by an alteration of internal conditions only or, and this will be the general case, by an alteration in both external and internal conditions. Now though I am quasi modo with regard to the Doctor's theories, it seems to me that whereas changes in the numerator term relate to the electron, changes in the denominator term, i.e. fractional states, must relate to the nucleus. Perhaps, those members familiar with intricacies of SCQM can advise me whether they see this view as at variance with the Doctor's. MCBJ Frank Grimer =======================================================
