Zachary Jones wrote:
Did you hear about the recent assert of a 'new state of matter'?
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-03/ns-hrf031407.php
From the article: "In the experiment, electrons moving in the interface
between two semiconductors behaved as though they were made up of
particles with only a fraction of the electron’s charge. This so-called
fractional quantum hall effect (FQHE) suggested that electrons may not
be elementary particles after all. However, it soon became clear that
electrons under certain conditions can congregate in a way that gives
them the illusion of having fractional charge – an explanation that
earned Laughlin, Horst Störmer and Daniel Tsui [L.S.T.] the Nobel prize"
[in 1998]
Funny, I was reading this just after contemplating a few of the recent
postings to the hydrino forum, and realizing that Mills Theory has even
more serious problems than most realize; even if he is mostly correct on
the experimental evidence.
"Mills' CQM is dead, but the hydrino lives" - that kind of thing. Except
now the verdict will read "CQM is dead, but PQP2 lives..." read on.
The thought occurred that L.S.T. quasi-particle might offer Mills, or
his reinterpreter, a way to salvage everything, as this entity answers
two issues elegantly.
Mills is of course too vain to ever change his views, and HSG is now
moving far away from neutrality, ergo vortex is the only forum where
alterations of Mills' theoretical views, but acceptance of BGSH (below
ground state hydrogen) is openly permitted and can be argued without
moderator interference.
Actually a growing number of Vo's have, by now, been convinced of the
obvious: that LENR is probably (in at least some cases) predicated on
deuterium within a metal-matrix first going into the BGS transitory
condition. I suspect the first two levels of Millsian shrinkage are
transitory (perhaps up to even 5 levels, before stability is reached).
The two open issues answered elegantly are: the source of energy, and
the ability to have a stable (uncharged !!) Hydrino hydride, that is
BGSH or shrinkage >6 which is essentially uncharged.
I believe the solar derived hydrino hydride (especially if neutral), is
the species which arrives on earth in the solar wind as a Hy bound
tightly with two quasi-particles, and is found in rainwater in ppm
quantities and in the oceans in ppb quantities). This is the entity
which provides many water anomalies.
This also revives Robin's open question about the connection between
mass and charge wrt the hydrino. I suspect that - just as the photon has
"effective mass", we will soon have proof that in the same understanding
"charge" also has this same kind of "effective mass" -- whether or not
that charge-mass is measurable now or not. Instrumentation will improve
soon.
On HSG it was argued by Eugene Wagner:
> The root mean square computation is inconsistent
> with the fundamental classical law of the preservation
> of angular momentum. Plus, Mills computes it in a second
> way which is equally incorrect.
> See HSG #10337, January 6, 2006.
That, and the fact that the vector sum must be less
than the scalar sum (which yields hbar) suggests
that the orbitsphere model comes up short in
angular momentum.
But it can be fixed. I suggest postulating an additional
intrinsic angular momentum to make up the deficit.
History has shown that that is a perfectly acceptable
approach: SQM does so for spin.
END of Wagner's message.
Prediction: "intrinsic angular momentum" is itself related to charge
somehow, and also to the LST quasi-particle, and all will be resolved
once these three issues are integrated [the three are "intrinsic angular
momentum", charge, and the quasi-particle and the resolution will
explain an apparently chargeless component of the solar wind which has
mass near 1GeV, and "looks" more like a stable neutron than anything
else. That particle is the solar-derived non-Millsian hydrino-hydride.
It should be renamed, and one choice for this revision of the Mills
hydrino is PQP2 (proton-quasi-particle sub2)
Jones
