Let’s be specific – what I am saying is that there is no universal speed of
transition applicable to all of quantum mechanics, and more specifically that
the Znidarsik value does not hold up under close scrutiny, especially not to
LENR, and offers zero predictive value that I can see.
Can you step out on a limb and make any prediction based on it?
snip lets try to see what came out of it.
1. the radii of the orbits of the atoms
2. the intensity of spectral emission
3. the Fermi distribution of electrons
4. a possible unification with quantum physics and special relativity
5. the frequency and the energy of a photon
6 the velocity of sound in the nucleus.
7 and the list goes on.
8 the lentr result predicts and increase in the strength of the spin orbit
force. How do get past the
coulombic barrier at low energy?
If that is not enough I calculated the radius of the universe in 1989 in my
book ELementary Antigravity.
that was before the space telescope and the radius was then given as between 8
and 20 billion light years.
I got 13.6 billion light years and that was published and it was proven to be
correct
Johns lift you head out of the sand, some of this may be wrong but not all of
it.
Frank Znidarsic
-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Thu, Dec 2, 2010 11:12 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Quantum Transitional State
From: seattle truth
Ø I agree that the statement you listed makes no sense… But your criticism
that speaking of the speed of transition as a speed is ridiculous is unfounded.
Let’s be specific – what I am saying is that there is no universal speed of
transition applicable to all of quantum mechanics, and more specifically that
the Znidarsik value does not hold up under close scrutiny, especially not to
LENR, and offers zero predictive value that I can see.
Can you step out on a limb and make any prediction based on it?
BTW – I do admire what you have put together in terms of fine videos which can
explain clearly many aspects of physics to a broad audience, most of which is
based on a litany of the Great Men of science. Good work there, but when it
comes to tying all that back to Frank’s hypothesis, “where’s the beef?”
Sorry, but I must admit that I do not see anything of value in megahertz-meter,
and would normally be content to remain silent on that issue, except that at
some point – “silence” implies consent, and tends to reflect poorly on all of
us who post here – some of whom may not see it as much more than fluff. And it
is not that I haven’t tried, over the years.
Jones
