Ha! Yes, it seems you linked to the article about the quarks far earlier than I did. My apologies for not reading your original post more closely. I think I saw it during lunch on my iPhone and didn't have time to give it the attention it deserved.
Yes, chiming in from knowledgeable people would be good too. :) It is fun as an amateur to speculate, but not worth a whole lot in the big scheme of things. Eric On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:52 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Eric:**** > > ** ** > > The article you reference **** > > http://phys.org/news/2013-04-quarks-dictate-proton.html **** > > was also included in my original posting… perhaps you should read the > entire thread?**** > > ** ** > > I for one would be interested in hearing other more knowledgeable people’s > opinions on the point of my posting, which is that what is lacking in > modern/mainstream atomic/nuclear physics is a physical model… HOW does one > explain WHY we see certain **specific** observations like I pointed out > in the original posting…**** > > ** ** > > LENR is searching for a theoretical model, and it is not going to be found > ‘inside the box’… **** > > ** ** > > -Mark Iverson >
