The "dense neutral background" must have effectively no inertia, otherwise stable orbits would soon collapse. Harry
From: Jones Beene <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 12:09:24 PM >Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dark matter may be an illusion caused by the quantum vacuum > >-----Original Message----- >From: Terry Blanton > >> "I suggest a third way, without introducing dark matter and without >modification of the law of gravity ... the key hypothesis is that matter and >antimatter are gravitationally repulsive, and there are two gravitational >charges: positive gravitational charge for matter and negative gravitational >charge for antimatter," - Hajdukovic > >Hmm... when you tie this in with Don Hotson and the Dirac epo field... with >that field being identified more or less AS the quantum vacuum itself - then >the conclusion is that positronium, either virtual or real, would >demonstrates this hypothesis in a surprising way. > >The positron, being antimatter repels the electron gravitationally and at >the same time attracts it electrostatically, so that there is a perfect >balance! ... and this is the way the epo is held together. Since epos define >zero point, then everything else builds on this dynamic structure (in the >background). > >Since the mass of either component is identical in an absolute way (either a >positive or negative) but neither is dominant, then the result is >essentially a dense neutral background in which we are immersed. The >background itself - although hidden - represents as much as 90% of all mass, >and it is in a dynamic tension. This is Dirac's so-called "sea of negative >energy" and in effect, Hajdukovic is simply redefining "dark matter" - and >not really supplying a valid alternative. It still ALL goes back to epos. > >The opportunity, if there is one, which presents itself with this insight >and more precise understanding of ZPE, is not obvious... except for this one >point: Perhaps the easiest way to look for a way to harness ZPE is to look >for anything which seems to "change" gravity ... which can include not only >an anti-gravity effect but also the opposite - a super-gravity effect >(putative weight gain). > >This may or may not be related to a kind of "supergravity" which is the >basis of superstring theory. > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supergravity > >However, there does seem to be one interesting cross-connection of all of >this to experimental results. This will be the subject of another posting, >as this one is getting a bit unwieldy. > >Hint: IRH (inverse Rydberg hydrogen) or fractional hydrogen (f/H) aka ... >the Mills' hydrino, "pycno" or spillover hydrogen - all of these terms are >descriptive of what is essentially "a heavier form of hydrogen." > >Instead of a 'reduced orbital' we could be looking at an "increased coupling >to gravitons" ... > >:) > >Jones > > > > > > > >
