Robin, When I open the document in Office 2007 and select page layout, page 6 is garbled with a following page. How does one correct this?
Otherwise, it is most interesting and the lissajous idea has always seemed to be an elegant solution (so elegant it is a surprise it has not been "borrowed" by RM ;-) - but one further suggestion that stands out now is a way to falsify the conclusion. One possible way is via alternative containment. Since the radius of your version of this species is the square of Mills' version - there can be no effective containment, one would think (??); as most all structural materials would be porous to a fraction of any such species. At least a small fraction should respond to a negative charge outside the reactor where they are formed, especially if the wall of that reactor is the cathode, yet an even higher negative charge lies outside it. For instance a thick MgO coating of the outside of a reactor, which is effective for containing hydrogen might pass some of your hydrinos but not Mills conception. How would one know, even if it were true, that ultra reduced radius hydinos were there ? Perhaps a hard vacuum outside a reactor where hydrinos are formed, and with a MgO coating or window, and following that - the appearance of H2 on reinflation would be one way to present the argument -- if, that is, H2 is seen after an extended period where a hard vacuum had been. Of course, we have known for half a century that hydrogen is the predominant residual gas in utrahigh vacuum [uhv] systems, and that the reduction in the hydrogen outgassing rate is the most challenging problem in achieving xhv even today. I can find no real assurance that this problem has EVER been solved over the long term! Sure it can be reduced but the background rate indicates something, no? So-called 'anomalous hydrogen' has been seen (claimed) in a number of experiments - but who is to say this does not indicate ubiquitous solar generated Hy - but of the (1/n)^2 variety which is eventually diffusing to earth's core due to its effectiv density ? Jones
