Thanks, sound is usually associated with the vibration of heavy nucleons and light with the vibration of less massive electrons. I have changed my wording a little as to not offend those with a closed mind and now say the speed of a mechanical wave in the nucleus. A mechanical wave is sound for the open minded. The equations are simple and only involve spring constant mass and displacement. I don't know what set Jones off, however, I think is zero pH acid rain and electrically charged capacitive rain are lutercress. I have much to do and have no time for lutercress people. I will no longer respond to Mr. Jones, be gone.
Frank Z While it is bvious to all who may be studying Frank's theory - the fact that here is no actual "sound" implied, I suspect it is nevertheless empting for most skeptics to focus on the original meaning of the ord and glibly conclude that his use of the word (to describe dynamic tates of an atom's nucleus) must mean Dr. Z is nothing more than a nformed deluded kook. It's almost a kind of cultural bias! Therefore... cased closed. How unfortunate. Regards -----Original Message----- From: OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Dec 2, 2010 6:14 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Quantum Transitional State >From Jones ... > My apologies if this does not constitute arrogance, as it may only have been said out of frustration. After all, it must be very frustrating to speak to hysicists about a speed of sound in the nucleus and wonder why you are getting a cold houlder ... On this point I can certainly sympathize with your commentary. ;-) I can not speak for Frank nor his decision to have chosen to use the erm "sound" to describe what I gather are interesting "vibrations" ccurring within the nucleus of atoms. It is in fact extremely nfortunate precisely because the original meaning of the word tends o get in the way of what I suspect Frank was actually attempting to onvey to his audience - that there may exist interesting vibrations nd harmonics at play. Not only that, such vibrations can perhaps be nderstood and mapped using simple algebraic formulas. While it is bvious to all who may be studying Frank's theory - the fact that here is no actual "sound" implied, I suspect it is nevertheless empting for most skeptics to focus on the original meaning of the ord and glibly conclude that his use of the word (to describe dynamic tates of an atom's nucleus) must mean Dr. Z is nothing more than a nformed deluded kook. It's almost a kind of cultural bias! Therefore... cased closed. How unfortunate. Regards teven Vincent Johnson ww.OrionWorks.com ww.zazzle.com/orionworks
