I think physical principles should be treated like fine clothes. Keep them but don't wear them all the time.
Harry On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 9:39 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > Let us not throw away the CoE too fast. I suggest that an solution will one > day appear that does not do this. > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Sat, Jun 16, 2012 9:15 pm > Subject: RE: [Vo]:Missing Neutrons (hydrinos) > > 1. If a neutron can disappear into the vacuum, then: > 1a. Can a neutron pop INTO this space (spontaneous formation)? > 2. For every neutron that exits, does another enter this space (to balance > things, remember CoE!)? > 3. If either #1 or #1a are possible, and not #2, then CoE gets tossed out > the > window! > > Altho, for all practical purposes, CoE would still appear to be intact, BUT, > if > we can optimize the popping out of existence within some object, and it > happens > often enough, then it would be possible to violate CoE within that object. > > Jones just opened a can of worms... and the feast begins! > :-) > -Mark > _____________________________________________ > From: Jones Beene [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 5:29 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [Vo]:Missing Neutrons (hydrinos) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > >> They don't need to disappear into reciprocal space. > > This isn't about "need" Robin - it is about explaining results. Most of the > time, of course, this kind of cooling reaction simply does not happen. Do > you > know of any other reports of anomalous cooling? > >> Hydrino molecules can quite easily disappear into ordinary space. They can > simply migrate through the atomic interstices of the container wall into the > atmosphere. > > Yes, of course ... at least if they are real - then that is probably true. > But > in that case there is only excess heat - not anomalous cooling. > > IOW, that will not explain a cooling effect, as you acknowledge, so why > mention > it? The Ahern results are beyond any possible chemical effect. The purpose > of > the posting was to present a possible rationale involving a new kind of > fractional hydrogen reaction, where the assumptions are very different. Net > cooling instead of heating. > > The common denominator seems to be simple - if neutrons can do this > disappearing > act, then virtual neutrons (maximum redundancy hydrogen) can possibly do the > same. In neither case am I claiming it is anything more than a remote > possibility. > > When I opined that there could be some kind of "momentum effect" what I > meant > was that in certain circumstances the entire sequence from atomic hydrogen > to > virtual neutron happens as one unstoppable progression, unlike the Mills' > hydrino - which is a sequential chain of reactions which occurs in up to 137 > steps. > > After all, this thread is merely the start of a new hypothesis, at this time > - > with which to explain new phenomena which previously was beyond explanation. > Maybe it will not survive more accurate objections, but one cannot > disqualify it > easily by suggesting that another unproved presumption (Mills hydrinos > operating > in only one way) makes it not possible ☺ simply because Mills himself may > have > overlooked another feature of a broader phenomena. > > Jones >
