Richard,
Ion resins are unique, and speaking of which ;-) perhaps you can suggest
the best available resin substrate with which to test the hypothesis
that a plastic-to-metal (Pd, Ni) interface - in which the plastic
substrate being used contains this type of chemical bonding involving
carbon and oxygen:
C
\
C=O
/
C
but ... in the greatest proportion.
As you can see from polycarbonate resins, this bond exists but in
relatively small proportion. Perhaps there is a better substrate wrt the
double-bonded oxygen availability.
I do not think that any experimenter has seriously looked at a plastic
substrates before, in this light and this includes Patterson himself.
Perhaps that is for good reason; but it cannot be ruled out in the
context of the hydrino.
As used in a CETI-type of cell, for instance, the substrate could be
active as a hydrino catalyst; and even if that seems improbable to many-
it is a testable premise which has not been tested. Of course, there are
many other options than the double bonded oxygen, but it seems to stand
out like a sore thumb.
Part of the problem here is that Mills divorced himself from LENR
early-on, for vanity reasons. Did Patterson ever even mention Mills or
read CQM? He should have.
IMHO, Mills is the most brilliant theorist in LENR, perhaps in all of
applied physics, yet even so his ego is a huge problem, and consequently
he failed to attract the kind of staff which could have helped him get
it right at BLP.
Physics has advanced to the point where NO lone theorist is capable of
making the "giant step" on his own any more. The old adage: "none of us
is as smart as all of us" was not valid in Dirac's time: Dirac was
smarter than the rest- but even that genius has been improved-on many
fold in today's world. And Mills is nowhere near Dirac, plus his ego has
kept the needed help away.
Not to mention, the ingrained hostility wrt the CF experimenters who
could have benefited from an early integration of the below-ground-state
phenomena.
My contention in this thread is that this one factor of hydrogen
shrinkage, is (possibly) all that Widom/Larson needed to get it right.
They failed (most likely), and a contributing reason for that failure is
because of this built-in and counter-productive hostility between the
two camps.
Of course, admittedly I am far-out on a shaky limb in assuming that
Mills got it mostly right, when the final chapter to that story is still
being edited.
But hey - that is what Vortex is all about, no? Pushing the envelope?
Jones
R.C.Macaulay wrote:
Jones wrote...
that in fact a complex set of reactions can be built upon the shrinkage
of hydrogen/deuterium to form a subthermal quasi-neutron of dineutron.
... or not. But it is a fascinating possibility (although admittedly of
remote likelihood).
Howdy Jones,
No more fascinating than the use of ion resins for water softening..
Richard
