-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] in reply to Terry Blanton's message:
>>> The idea is that the ZPE is the provider of *all* mass to all things. >> Is this an elaboration of or a replacement for the Higgs field? > I don't think Higgs is a requirement for the Puthoff theory. Correct. Thank you Terry. Hmm ... don't be so quick to write Puthoff off wrt Higgs. It may not have been a "former requirement" but things change. Zero-point energy is the energy that remains when all other energy is removed from a system (the vacuum) which can be identified essentially with the Higgs boson, in one interpretation - or the epo field in another - or "the jitters" in another. As I understand Puthoff (and who can?) he goes back to Schroedinger's solution to the Dirac equation for describing the motion of an electron, which results in a necessary component that is interpreted as random fluctuations of a point-like particle. This motion is called 'zitterbewegung' (German for 'jitter"). That energy is tiny but quantifiable. The Higgs, in contrast is huge but divisible. In SED theory, the phenomenon of zitterbewegung (ZB) is caused by the electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations. Next we go to the source of (ZB)from a different perspective, the harmonic oscillator. A quantum harmonic oscillator cannot be brought to rest since it has a residual motion will due to the requirements of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. This results in a zero-point energy, equal to 1/2 hf, where f is the oscillation frequency. We are building up to Higgs <=> ZPE. So without getting in over my head, the way that Puthoff might rationalize this situation is to say that the connection in SED theory between zitterbewegung and the zero-point fluctuations is in defining the mass-generating role of the Higgs field as intrinsic, instead of seeing SED as being an alternative to the Higgs field. It always seems like a cop-out when you defeat the enemy by absorbing his support into your support, and that happens throughout history in many ways, including science - by showing that he has salient features that even his supporters cannot tolerate. This is the way Nature works - by lowest common denominator. This is not always desirable from one's personal appraisal, and the political overtones should be apparent ... but as for practicality, is there any way that we can derive practical aspects for LENR experiments - from the billion dollar boondoggle of Higgs? Dunno, but the simplest way would be to tie the mass energy of Higgs into the Dirac epo field somehow, and then into proton reactivity. There is a precise ratio there, but it is not apparent how it can be useful. Human analytic ability is not keyed to finding meaning in such large apparent disproportion. However, this number does correlate to the suspected "excess mass" available from the average mass of protons. Awkshully, it is almost identical, but that could be because yours truly plugged in numbers of his own choosing.
