In reply to a blog comment http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/blog/7200-hydrino-patent-based-catalyst-denie d-while-later-patent-relativistic-hydrogen-based-casimir-cavity-granted.html #comment-51584
Thomas to quote you, "Since then, I have made the argument that the Casimir effect is caused by the thermal blackbody radiation emitted in the FIR by atoms in the surface of Casmir's plates. Electrostatic charging is not invoked. By this theory, wavelengths L > 2G are excluded from the gap G as Casimir assumed. But unlike Casimir and his followers, I do not throw away the excluded EM energy from the gap. Instead, I conserve the excluded EM energy by creating UV and higher energy photons having wavelength L = 2G in the gap. In effect, the gap acts as a FIR frequency up-conversion device as required by the conservation of energy." I agree with the idea of up-conversion but it is the entire spectrum of space-time that up converts via a new inertial frame inside the cavity. Even normal Casimir theory admits the remaining vacuum wavelengths are higher in frequency but normal Casimir theory also thinks ZPE (sum of remaining waveforms energy) is reduced wheras I am arguing that ZPE would still appear constant inside the cavity and only appears reduced from our perspective outside the cavity due to relativistic effects. that is to say that the wavelengths create a new inertial frame in order to fit inside the cavity. a gas atom or any matter caught in this inertial frame sees an unchanged population of short/long wavelengths and the Casimir plates appear far enough apart to contain these wavelengths without any wavelength suppression. This may mean the suggestion by Beck and Mackey that wavelengths below 2Thz are more gravitationally active is really a matter of perspective - a useful relativistic measure but not an absolute measure. It also solves for the numerous claims of "shrunken" hydrogen such as hydrino, clusters, deuteron ice, ultra dense deuterium and fractional hydrogen as forms of relativistic containment. It even suggests our view of catalytic action may be in error, What we perceive as accelerated reactions outside a catalyst may actually occur at the normal rate from the perspective of the reactants. Regards Fran
