Robin— This is the first time I have heard that Mills (or anyone else) thinks mass changed into energy causes the Universe’s expansion. In General Relativity it would be like changing the space from a positive curvature to a negative curvature (I think) at all points—that would explain the observed increase of the rate of expansion. The following WIKIPEDIA item addresses this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-de_Sitter_space ROBIN, do you have a Mill’s reference to this claim? It may be of interest to the massification and demassification ideas Hatt, Meulenberg and others hav theorized. I consider that Hatt’s interest in the reasons for differences in magnetic moments of the neutron, proton and alpha particles is well founded. The answer may be related to the space/time/…)maybe spin) fabric of the Universe with these independent parameters, which are sensed by the entire fabric like it is a coherent QM system. The following link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-de_Sitter_space suggests an increase of negative curvature of anti-de Sitter space. The 1977 report of anomolus magnetic moment of suerpositronium; https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.16.161 by A. O. Barut and Kraus may add additional understand to the magnetic moments of non-primary particles. Barut has written more since the 1977 paper. From his book, WHAT ARE THE TRUE BUILDING BLOCKS OF MATTER he writes the following: “As What is new, however, is the recognition that magnetic forces between the stable particles, when treated non-perturbatively, become very strong at short distances (short ranged), provide a deep enough well to give rise to high mass narrow resonances, have saturation property and give rise, by magnetic pairing, to the compensation of the large magnetic moment of the electron. In the construction of atoms and molecules we make use only of the electric (Coulomb) part of the electromagnetic forces and treat magnetic forces as small perturbations. There is, however, another regime of energies and distances in which magnetic forces play the dominant role and the electric forces are small perturbations. We shall show this duality with explicit calculations. It would have been strange if Nature provided magnetic forces just to be tiny corrections to the building principle of atoms and molecules (which could exist without them) and not to play an equally important role in the structure of matter. Clearly, a model of this type also automatically provides a dynamical theory of nuclear forces.” I recall, Hatt’s predictions of magnetic moments for protons, neutrons and muons are available to many significant figures—way beyond the range of current data—and thus provide good prediction for theory confirmation. He may be able to address the superpositroniun issue as well. Bob Cook From: mix...@bigpond.com<mailto:mix...@bigpond.com> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 11:20 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Podcast of interest In reply to Dave Roberson's message of Thu, 25 Jan 2018 13:17:02 -0500: Hi, [snip] >I realize that mass and energy are two different forms of existence, but >should we expect the remainder of the universe to know this has happened other >than by the interactions between the two objects before and after the event >and other particles. > >Dave If I understand Mills correctly, then he says that it precisely the conversion of mass into energy that causes the expansion of the universe. IOW, yes the rest of the universe does know. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
