I had the same idea about DH and QI together answering the galactic rotation
problem. The Mills spectrum of DH surely warrants a comparative review with
the observed spectrum from the Milky Way or other near by galaxies.
Maybe Mills has already done this comparison; if not, he should IMHO.
Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 10:14 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Quantized inertia Ted talk removes need for dark matter
andexplains the EM drive
There is a new study from NASA on dark matter/ dark energy and the
reinterpretation of the Chandra findings WRT the mystery radiation signature at
CERN has a new report on DM as well. The informed opinion on dark matter swings
back and forth but for sure, whatever it is, is no longer dark and this is
compatible with a version of quantized inertia.
At best, McCulloch’s hypothesis would not eliminate DM entirely but instead
reduce the need for it - the percentage of mass in galaxies which needs to be
explained by something other than the standard model. Causality can be
reconciled so long as we do not insist on extremes. Most importantly, from the
perspective of LENR, if there is any connection of UDH (ultra dense hydrogen)
to dark matter, then of course it becomes very relevant for understanding the
dynamics of dense hydrogen. In short, even if DM is a lower percentage of all
mass (lower than ~85%) it can be identified with UDH, and that finding is huge
In McCulloch’s blog he has a page that covers LENR from the perspective of his
discussions with Ed Storms and the application of QI to the deuterium lattice.
From there, he goes on to the perspective of using advanced semiconductor
techniques to achieve an ideal matrix of cracks and surface cavities.
Specifically, McCulloch talks about the geometry of 1 nm as being feasible
soon, but this is actually possible now. Yet-- if the Chandra findings hold,
especially in the context of Holmlid, then the optimal geometry appears to be
smaller – about .35 nm which is the wavelength of photons at 3.5 keV. We appear
to be moving from nano to pico rapidly.
All of which means that silicon valley could find a new technology focus – a
newer “next big thing” based on using “picolithography” for both information
What do you think about Mikes theory of quantized inertia (QI)? And what about
his use of QI to explain galactic mechanics without dark matter? Does the
emdrive mistake void the concept of QI?
(The Ted talk has been deleted from youtube apparently.
From: Bob Higgins<mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
I have read McCulloch's book. His proposition fails in causality. Filters do
not form with a filled state, they have a finite impulse response that he
hadn't addressed when I asked him about it.
Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com<mailto:russ.geo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Here’s Mike McCulloch’s TedX talk last Thursday. It is remarkable work.
Mike is what one might call as ‘armchair physics anti-matter’ as he annihilates
the fiction of dark matter with straight forward math and real data,
eliminating the dark matter fudge that has made a sticky mess of science for a