One point not adequately expressed is that the Heisenberg POV is totally
grounded in three dimensions, whereas Mills OS (orbitsphere) is defined
as two dimensional only . Big difference.
Even so, I am not sure that Mills got this exactly right, but to
understand that even more remote reservation, one would need to go
further out on the shaky limb of alternative fizzix and into the "extra"
time dimension(s).
IOW instead of:
1) 3-space + time (Heisenberg assumption) or
2) 2-space + time (Mills assumption) there is (could be)
3) 2-space + 2-time (alternative QM time dimensional variable)
no "two-timing cheater" puns please.... 2-time does potentially explain
half-spin... anyway ... moving on.
A possible variation to the "Planck-stick", so to speak, would involve
a power law - which could reflects a dimensional change. This would be
inherent in the Fourier transform of the angular frequency, which
comes into play in Mills' math. I wish that I understood Fourier
transforms better, because now I am operating only in a metaphor mode.
However, from that perspective, many of the believers in CQM find
Mills ideas intuitive, even if they disagree with Heisenberg.[snip]
HH:
In any case, Mills is pretty late in coming to market. He seems to be
joining a long line of failures. Something better is needed, or at
least more publicly available.
On that point we agree, except that Mills may be closer to partial
success than failure. 'Huge success' is still within reach.
His own reticence in sharing all experimental results (he freely shares
the good, but leaves out data which HAS TO BE THERE) is his worst enemy.
That and not providing people like EarthTech with full and complete
cooperation and means of verification. His so-called "independent"
replications are laughing stock ... yet there has to be something there
which is very exciting - unless of course, he is a pathological liar of
the "wag-the-dog" variety.
A full replication by a quality lab -- and Mills is on his way to
Stockholm, Heisenberg notwithstanding, no?
Jones
