Fran,
Think about the implications of this hypothesis, in the context of your own work a little more deeply. This is not semantics. If the specific theoretical value of the constant is correct then WOW ! you of all people should benefit the most from that knowledge, since it is spot-on to what you are doing ! What I am saying is that it does not compute it seems to be way off when you get down to brass tacks. Let me explain. Casimir cavities have a precise geometric range that is very specific 2-10 nanometers. This is known fact. Above or below, there is no useful force that can be documented. Plus the force is QM - so this is exactly where the megahertz-meter should be applicable. Is it applicable in this ideal situation or not? If the constant in question has any scientific validity at all, it would tell you the frequency range where these cavities couple to photons to become resonant, or more active due to quantum coupling, based on megahertz-meter. The effect should be dramatic, since FZ sez this is related to LENR, and all kinds of other miracles. If the megahertz-meter value cannot show at least that minimal bit of independent evidence, then it is fluff, since he has said over and over that this is exactly what it should do. You can and should review all of the literature an look for lets see according to Frank, it should be a 100 THz special resonance in Casimir cavities, in order to get it to work out to megahertz-meter, correct? At 10 nm cavity size - this brings the MHz-meter into a direct real world application, and it should be very tight. IOW there should be a massive coupling to Casimir cavities at 100 THz or about 3 microns wavelength, if the hypothesis is correct, and which is remarkably better coupling than at 110 or 90 THz, should there not? Maybe I am confused, and it is early here, so I need my latte, but let me know if you find this value useful in any way - or if I got the numbers wrong. BTW, if you remember, my review of the literature some months ago shows the yes indeed there is a well-known coupling frequency which is directly tied to Casimir cavities, and is seen throughout nature, and over billions of years of evolution, so this is no ones false re-interpretation. I have referred to this sub-field on several occasion as FRET (Förster resonance energy transfer) and it couples light at ~440-480 nm to and from cavities, as opposed to Franks presumed value ~3000 nm (which would be the megahertz-meter value, if I am not mistaken which is over 6 times too high). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%B6rster_resonance_energy_transfer I am fully prepared to eat crow and change from big critic to big supporter if there is some real use for this constant over and above ego-aggrandizement which seems to be its main use for now. It seems to be way-off of any real-world usefulness. You could throw darts and do as well. Jones From: Roarty, Francis X I am less concerned about the perceived wrongness of the FZ geometry . The oversized radius that Jones points out may be based on a difference in semantics since FZ refuses to consider a 4d model. These conflicting perceptions will occur if the environment is actually relativistic. Again it is my belief in the Naudts concept of relativistic hydrogen that leads me to a modified interpretation of Casimir effect based on a nano form of equivalent acceleration. I have gotten myself wrapped around this same axle when trying to explain a 4d effect in 3d terms BUT what intrigues me is this elastic limit of space and if it relates to the number of steps for fractional hydrogen or to the limits cited by Lifshitz regarding the dissipation of Casimir force as a gas atom approaches contact with a Casimir plate. Recall that time appears to slow and objects app ear to shrink from both perspectives when discussing 2 observers in 2 different inertial frames while locally neither is actually changing. My posit is that the outside of a Casimir cavity accumulates equivalent acceleration much faster than normal matter which then dissipates and averages out by the normal square law BUT where the mouth of the cavity occurs is able to dissipate the equivalent acceleration accumulated by the plates MUCH faster like the wind spilling through a small hole in a sail just as the wind speed through the hole can become many times faster than ambient wind speed, the energy density in between the plates can become much lower than the ambient energy density outside the plates Even lower than the zero reference of open space such that we would call this a negative acceleration, a stationary inertial frame would appear to be accelerating away (at least equivalently) from any material occupying the inertial frame inside a Casimir cavity becoming equateable t o the high speed Twin in the Twin paradox while the hydrogen in the cavity (from its perspective) is equitable to the stationary twin remaining on earth. Fran
