In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 4 May 2011 06:53:02 -0700: Hi, I think there is a much simpler explanation, involving more or less T being absorbed into the Ti. When it's in the lattice the weak beta radiation is stopped by the metal. When the T is a free gas, the beta radiation is not prevented from reaching the detector.
>If ZPE radiation is being upshifted in a cavity then the Reifenschweiler >effect would more likely be an increase in the decay rate, not a decrease. >This is because the nucleus would be over-stimulated in the sense of the >induced gamma effect, and it would decay faster, not slower. > >If seems more likely that radiation is being neither upshifted or >downshifted, at least in the Reifenschweiler effect. > >Unlike many observers, I see the decay rate of the tritium in the Casimir >cavity (from the perspective of the tritium itself) as NOT changing ! > >...but instead some of the beta decay is being ported into a ZPE "sink" >instead, so it only appears to us, outside the cavity ,that the decay rate >it is slower than it was. > >IOW some of the radiation goes into Dirac 'reciprocal space' or a correlate, >and we simply do not see it in 3-space, but from the standpoint of the rate >itself and the tritium itself - nothing has changed. > >This can explain the Rossi heating effect when you substitute IRH (inverted >Rydberg hydrogen) for tritium. More on that later. > >Jones > > >From: Roarty, Francis X > >Robin, > I had the same original "displacement" concept until >recently and I think it is roughly equivalent to the "up shifted" term Scott >and Thomas introduced me to. The issue with the "displacement" concept is it >carries with it an image of a vacant portion of space where the displaced >wavelength used to reside. While my relativistic theory doesn't exactly >match either concept the "up shifted" concept Thomas Prevenslik first >introduced me to comes from a thermal dynamic perspective of Casimir effect >- I used to consider this the "other" camp for Casimir theory vs. the >"displacement" camp that I was more comfortable with - Thomas comes at this >from a perspective of thermal dynamics and will argue the plates are not >"pushed" together and that ether doesn't need to exist to explain the >effect, he explains the effect as an imbalance created by "up shifting" >causing the plates to self attract. Although my "relativistic" concept >now represents a new 3rd option/camp I chose to refer to the "up shifting" >version as the alternative because it already deals with what I consider a >misconception of there being a "vacancy" - the energy summation is still >reduced because energy content reduces with wavelength until some cutoff >frequency beyond which it is meaningless to integrate, therefore an up >shifted spectrum will also sum to a lower energy total. For a while I just >went with the idea that the vacancy got filled in with shorter wavelengths >but the "up shifted" concept already handles that issue plus it is an easier >transition to the "relativistic" concept because it already has the same >remote perspective of faster wavelengths inside the cavity... the only thing >it lacked was my position that the wavelengths would appear unchanged to a >local observer in the cavity... which as I have said previously is more in >keeping with the changes in energy density, anomalous increases in C >transition time thru the cavity as measured externally and >Claims of variation of radioactive decay rates. >Regards >Fran > > > >Re: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities! >mixent >Wed, 04 May 2011 00:28:40 -0700 >In reply to francis 's message of Tue, 3 May 2011 06:09:29 -0400: >Hi, >[snip] >>Scott and I have collaborated and communicated at length regarding a >Casimir >>theory based on relativistic contraction of the longer vacuum wavelengths >>which still appear full length to an observer inside the cavity instead of >>the present theory where the longerwavelengths are simply upshifted to >>higher frequency inside the cavity. > > >As I understand it, they are not normally upshifted. They are excluded >altogether, because they are too long to fit in the cavity. It's precisely >because they are excluded that they press on the outside, but not on the >inside >walls of the cavity, hence producing a pressure that pushes the walls >together. >Only the wavelengths greater than the cavity dimensions are responsible for >this, and since these represent but a minute fraction of the total, the >force is >very small, until the walls get very close together. That's because as they >approach one another, the excluded wavelengths get shorter and shorter, >representing an ever increasing amount of vacuum energy. > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > >http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
