Stephen,
Snip---
>The hydrino radius
> between the nucleus and orbital has a temporal rise and spatial run
[snip]
Let's stop right there. The "present", for any observer, has zero
thickness along that observer's time axis. What does it mean for the
radius of the orbit to have an increased extent along the time axis?
Reply----
The observer is a theoretical construct but matter exists in a 4
dimensional world. You can not prove the "present" has zero thickness
although it may be both negligible and average to a constant local width
this changes at the extremes. I must admit that I can not prove my theory
either but the width of the "present" is not defined to my knowledge. I
contend temporal width varies microscopically with each element in the
periodic chart relative to its' permittivity to vacuum fluctuations but it
averages out at larger scales to form local constants allowing us to ignore
it and use non relativistic equations for most everyday comparisons. The
known time dilation approaching an event horizon and the known change (up
conversion) of vacuum fluctuations in a Casimir cavity form opposite ends of
a spectrum. I don't think it is a coincidence that the conductive pores in
skeletal catalysts are of Casimir geometry and posit that Casimir force is
the engine for all catalytic action whether it be from pores, spacing
between nano particles or even the atomic geometry of the elements
themselves forming adjacent outcroppings - if it forms parallel conductive
plates on any scale it will have Casimir force and therefore the catalytic
property of "accelerating" reactions may be a far more accurate term then
presently presumed. This then is where my speculation regarding a spectrum
from Casimir cavity to speed of light was born.
When I first heard Black light was confirmed by Rowan to produce excess heat
last October I immediately looked up the pore size of Rayney nickel and for
all of a week thought I was the only one to figure it out it was a Casimir
cavity before discovering Haisch and Moddell had already patented a similar
cavity scheme based on Casimir cavities back in May 08. Then I got busy
trying to reverse engineer what was happening at Black Light making the
giant assumption that the confirmation was legitimate. I had the same notion
of Casimir effect you mentioned to Horrace but started communicating with
Thomas Prevenslik who has authored much in ZPE theories and learned the
theory is disputed with QED who can explain all with induced charge and
virtual photons independent of virtual particles "pushing" (they hate that
term with a passion) the plates closed. Both theories however agree that the
plates braced apart do form a permanent exclusion zone regardless of
wavelength suppression theory or up-conversion where short wavelengths
replace the long... I jumped on this common ground that there was simply a
"non standard" ratio of short to long wavelength vacuum fluctuations between
the plates as being the "difference" that allows anomally to occur.
In studying the history between Mills vs Park vs Naudts I was spoon fed Jan
Naudts equations by a sibling. His use of relativistic Klein Gordon
equations made me realize that the "up conversion" of vacuum fluctuations
could have a relativistic solution - imagine a sine wave across your scope
twisting on the Z axis disappearing into the screen and getting smaller from
our perspective is actually getting higher in frequency or conversely you
could say the virtual particles in between the plates would give the
appearance of getting smaller. I made the leap that these shorter
fluctuations are the same longer fluctuations in some fashion changed due to
their shielding by a Casimir field generated by the plates. The "up
conversion" may actually represent more of a relaxation of the zone like a
"trapped pool" vs the rushing stream outside the cavity. Since these
fluctuations represent the canvas upon which atomic matter is painted and
For that matter keep the orbits from decaying I assumed the hydrogen atom
also was redistributed - Here Mills already told me what to look for a
smaller hydrogen he called "hydrino" Looking back it may prove his use of
catalyst vs Casimir cavity might turn out to be only semantics. My early
animations are all gone now and even the present incarnation may not be 100
percent accurate showing the orbital of monatomic hydrogen twisting and
getting smaller as they permeate into a pair of moving plates - the twisting
was my method for implying the translation being onto the time axis which I
posit opens inversely to the closing of the spatial axis between conductive
plates. The plates are supposed to represent a special case of Casimir
cavity / rigid catalyst that confines this opening to the temporal axis such
that only the atoms can translate freely and molecules or compound get
stuck, So that in the case I animate the dihydrinos form already on the time
axis but as the plates start to open you see the molecule ripped apart then
a blue photon emitted as the restored hydrinos reform into a molecule in a
repeated cascade till the atoms escape or the cavity overheats and melts the
plates closed. I was only recently reminded of the Lorentz contraction and
realized my theory is really only an alternate form where outside the cavity
is analogous to the event horizon due to whatever ambient rate at which time
intercepts our spatial axis vs the relaxed condition of the fluctuations
inside the shielded cavity.
Also communicated with Model regarding his SED based prototype over
concern that any reactionary forces would simply prevent the circulation of
monatomic gas thru his Casimir "colums" - he convinced me this would not
occur and has equations included in his patent - I took this as another
possible indication that the anomaly had a relativistic source in that
vacuum fluctuations could "organize" to break the bonds of a temporally
displaced dihydrino without presenting a spatial bias to resist the gas
supply. He never would tell me how he intended to supply monatomic gas :_)
But like me was also interested in finding a cheaper bulk material to form
the cavities as milling plates and insulators with perfectly aligned .1u
columns is very expensive! I have suggested crystalline shaped bulk nano
materials where the facets might form Casimir cavities between the facets
much like his columns as opposed to the Mills cavities which are likely
melting down in their brief thermal reaction.
Sorry for the detour into my past - back to work
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Snip1
Time is not a spatial dimension, after all, and there *is* a difference
between time and space, even in special relativity. The "radius" is a
distance measure between the nucleus and the electron, which is, in
classical terms, determined by finding the coordinates of an event at
the nucleus and an event at the electron, determining that their time
coordinates *match* in our frame of reference, and then finding the
difference in their space coordinates. In other words, the absolute
value of the interval between an event in the nucleus and one at the
electron is the radius of the orbit (in our frame of reference) *if* the
time coordinates of the two events match (in our frame of reference).
Snip2 Now, you say the radius is rotated into time, and so it appears
shorter
in space.
Reply both
Time does not act like a spatial dimension in that we must accelerate or
deaccelerate relative to another frame to observe a divergence but the
Lorentz contraction is an indication that matter is going somewhere. If you
built a ring with a 1 light year diameter you would expect the radius to be
1/2 the diameter but if you place it around a star the circumference would
remain the same as would the diameter calculated from the circumference but
if you could fly straight across your ring through the star the distance
traveled would greatly exceed your true diameter. At macro scales it is hard
to imagine that the sun isn't straight overhead at mid day because we have
evolved vision with the premise that we can see in a straight line but light
follows the curvature of space. Also making relativity an issue is that you
really can't approach the observed object at C without approaching C
yourself but you could harvest the temporal effects by storing terminally
ill patients near C until technology catches up with their disease. I am
proposing that when you drop reactants into a catalyst and harvest hours of
work performed in only a fraction of that time you are also harvesting a
relativistic effect.
---------------------------------------------------
snip
Please explain how (in principle) you would measure the size of the
radius, and what it means for it to be rotated into time.
reply
The radius to the nucleus remains the constant of the Bohr model, I am
saying that non relativistic equations for fractional quantum states are
likely solving only for the spatial value of the orbital diameter which we
observe while we are incapable of observing distance on the time axis but
since we know the bohr length then the first fractional quantum state means
the spatial parameter would appear to be 1/2 Bohr while the nucleus assumed
to be in the middle is displaced on the time axis similar to the sun down a
gravity well. the distance to the nucleus remains Bohr length but now has a
temporal component equal to the square root of Bohr length squared /2
