The definition of a coulomb as being in amperes times seconds is showing that 
charge is the integral of current over time into some region of space.  This is 
consistent with what I would expect.


If the moving charge of an electron were to be distributed over the space it 
occupies without any gaps in the flow, then there would be no external 
radiation as far as I know.  This would be equivalent to a DC current that is 
always flowing at a constant rate and path.  I think of the net structure as 
being a very large sum of individual loops of flowing charge.  The magnitude of 
the charge in any one constant loop can be different than the other loops, but 
must be constant over its particular flow path.  This should work for any three 
dimensional shape that each constant current path follows, such as the quantum 
orbitals associated with atoms.


To make an arrangement of this nature work, you must give up the concept of a 
point sized electron charge in motion around the nucleus.  Instead, the 
electron charge must be stretched out over its three dimensional path.


Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: H Veeder <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed, Aug 7, 2013 12:08 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:ICCF18 Kim Slides



It could be that charge as a static entity is fundamentally an illusion. 
Perhaps it is a useful illusion, but it is still an illusion.
Notice that the coulomb, the unit of charge, is defined in terms of Amperes X 
Seconds. 
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb
 
Perhaps all charged particles are self-sustaining currents.
 
 
Harry
 



On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 11:21 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:

Guys, I have a question that I would like for you to answer.  You speak of a 
balance between classical radiation and some zero point balancing act as the 
reason that the electron remains in an orbit around the central proton in 
hydrogen without radiation.  In most, if not all of the systems that I have 
played with, the radiation that is observed within the far field can be 
determined by integration of an infinite number of individual radiating 
elements.  Each one generates a far field pattern that is either enhanced or 
balanced out by others.


This balancing act is why a constant DC current does not radiate energy away 
from the source supply and the reason that a huge MRI magnet can put out such a 
large field without radiating away the drive energy.  So, why would we not be 
able to calculate the ZPE field you describe as merely a second component which 
vector sums with the original field that would have resulted in radiation 
without that balance?  This type of balance would be equivalent to a negative 
radiation source with a pattern that is exactly out of phase with the original 
one generated by the orbiting electron.


Calculation of far field patterns due to current can be quite enlightening as 
the net effects appear to violate COE in many cases.   The simple DC loop 
current case is an interesting example to consider.  Each differential element 
of current around the loop should radiate energy to the far field in a well 
defined manner.  But, when the vector sum of all of the radiating elements is 
completed, a balance is found that demonstrates that no net far field is seen.  
Perhaps something of this nature occurs with an atom and the orbiting electron.


Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: Roarty, Francis X <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Cc: puthoff <[email protected]>
Sent: Mon, Aug 5, 2013 9:32 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:ICCF18 Kim Slides



Mark,
Just finished Puthoff’s 2012 paper and although I like his conclusion below I 
still feel he is avoiding giving credit to the creation and  annihilation of 
pairs as powering all atomic  and subatomic motion, he refers to a 
“balance”between photon emission and ZP absorption but appears to be paying 
homage to our ingrained assumption in physics that atomic motion is just an 
inherent property of matter where I would argue that matter would collapse and 
time would not even exist without thesevirtual pairs streaming thru our spatial 
dimensions perpendicular to space..  [snip] Atoms therefore constitute open 
systemsengaged in dynamic interactions with the surrounding vacuum states. 
Specifically, the on net radiationless characteristicof the ground state is 
shown here to derive from particle‐vacuum interactions in which a dynamic 
equilibriumis established between radiation emission due to particle 
acceleration, and compensatory absorptionfrom the zero‐point fluctuations of 
the vacuum electromagnetic field. Thus, the vacuum field is formally 
necessaryfor the stability of atomic structures, and this underlying principle 
therefore constitutes an important featureof quantum ground states. [/snip] . 
Fran
 
_____________________________________________
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 12:35 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:ICCF18 Kim Slides
 
 
Dammit Fran, ya made me leave the Dimebox Saloon to go look up the refs… 
Good news is that my memory isn’t fading yet!
 
2012: Quantum Ground States as Equilibrium Particle‐Vacuum Interaction States
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.1952.pdf
 
And his first paper on this in ’87:
http://www.earthtech.org/publications/PRDv35_3266.pdf
 
Abstract
A  remarkable  feature  of  atomic  ground  states  is  that  they  are  
observed  to  be radiationless in nature, despite (from a classical viewpoint) 
typically involving charged particles in accelerated motions.  The simple 
hydrogenatom is a case in point.  This universal ground‐state characteristic is 
shown to derive from particle‐vacuum interactions in which a dynamic 
equilibrium  is  established  between  radiation  emission  due  to  particle  
acceleration,  and compensatory absorptionfrom the zero‐point fluctuations of 
the vacuum electromagnetic field [1].  The result is a net radiationless ground 
state.  This principle constitutes an overarching constraint that delineates an 
important feature of quantum ground states.
 
And this work by David Rodriguez which adds to the above:
 
2012:  “Orbital stability and the quantum atomic spectrum from Stochastic 
Electrodynamics”
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.6168
 
Last part of Abstract:
Puthoff's work led necessarily to the quantization of angular momentum: "if 
stable orbits exist... then their angular momentum must be quantized"; now, 
too, we are able to do a much stronger statement: "the equations of the 
system,in the presence of ZPF background, lead necessarily to a discrete set of 
stable orbits".
 
Rodriguez’s paper is extensive…
 
Fran’s buying the next round of drinks!!
J
 
-Mark Iverson
_____________________________________________
From: Frank roarty [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2013 7:13 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Vo]:ICCF18 Kim Slides
 
 
Mark, I think Puthoff fell short in suggesting ZPE keeps the electron and 
nucleus spatially separated.. Jan Naudts 2005 paper on relativistic hydrogen 
suggests f/h is relativistic based on Casimir suppression.. that tells me the 
largervirtual particles are still present in a cavity but appear contracted 
from our inertial frame. Rhueda and Haisch make the analogy for Lorentzian 
contraction of a spacecraft approaching C as a car driving thru a rainstorm.. 
the faster the cars forward speedthe denser the rain becomes in a Pythagorean 
relationship with the downward speed of the rain. We know time dilation is 
undetectable except by relative measure and the virtual particles measured in a 
lab near C, a stationary lab floating in free space or anano sized lab in a 
Casimir cavity would all see virtual particles of normal size and be unaware of 
any time dilation. It is this Pythagorean relationship that makes me posit a 
relativistic explanation for Casimir effect and that the nucleus and electron 
aretemporally displaced, The electron is electrically tethered but is opposed 
from temporal displacement by a stream of virtual particles passing through our 
physical plane on the temporal axis… it is this orientation that is responsible 
for relativistic measureas it establishes our time metric individually for our 
inertial frame like the little zip toys that kids would pull the gear tape and 
then let fly…. We don’t know how fast the ether [gear tape] is spinning us up 
locally since it represents our clock it alwaysseems like C from our local 
measure. 
I jumped on Jones post because I am always on the look out for a self 
assembling Maxwellian demon like process that will prove the HUP can be 
exploited. The concept of changing the Casimir force thru migration while an 
IRH/heavy electronis locked into a p orbital of Ni is intriguing.. a self 
assembled rectifying agent? Where random motion of gas is supposed to cancel 
out spatially this scenario doesn’t have to become directionalized as long as 
it moves between areas with different values ofCasimir force it will stress the 
heavy electron because the f/h will be translating to different values but the 
electron is unable to leave the p orbital…. You need this asymmetry where  the 
f/h value can oppose random motion and discount the thermal energyrequired for 
chemical reaction..in this case I think it may ionize the Ni, immediately 
reform to the appropriate fractional value for it’s local geometry and reform 
in the p shell as a heavy electron again in an endless reaction based on 
changes in Casimirforce. This may even be close to the Mills animations… nice 
hypothesis by Jones!
Fran
_____________________________________________
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2013 1:04 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Vo]:ICCF18 Kim Slides
 
 
Jones/Fran,
Wish I had time to read more; my vortex folder has 560 unread msgs!  This may 
have been suggested before, but I’ll throw it out there into the collective to 
see if it strikes accord with anyone…
 
In thinking (heretically, of course!) about f/H states, and how the mainstream 
thinks sub-ground-state states are figments of our imaginations, I may have an 
explanation.
 
I think it was Puthoff who suggested that a continual interaction (xchng of E?) 
between the ZPF and electrons is what maintains them at some distance from the 
nucleus.  Well, when atoms find themselves in a Casimir cavity, and someof the 
larger wavelength ZPF is EXCLUDED, then there is LESS ZPE (E not F) to maintain 
what we know as the ground state of electrons of those atoms.  Thus, the 
electrons fall to a lower level which balances with whatever level of ZPE is 
present in the Casimircavity…  am I behind the 8-ball on this?  Has this been 
proposed yet?
 
-Mark Iverson
 
_____________________________________________
From: Jones Beene [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2013 7:23 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Vo]:ICCF18 Kim Slides
 
 
_____________________________________________
From: Frank roarty 
 
…just staying with Ni and f/h would this hypothesis be consistent with the 
anomalous spectrum emitted? Would this f/h acting as a heavy electron give off 
photons when changing state..and again how would itchange state if it is locked 
into the p orbital..could the fractional value change states while still acting 
as a heavy electron?
 
Fran
 
I see where you are going with this suggestion, which is provocative - but the 
answer is unknown. It looks like you are trying to move beyond the Mills’ 
theory into a zero point explanation. We have discussed before that there is a 
knownconnection between ZPE and phase-change, but most of the evidence for this 
is in other fields.
http://www.isis.stfc.ac.uk/science/bioscience/changes-in-proton-zero-point-energy-responsible-for-dna-phase-change11125.html
 
Actually there is a niche of science concerned with materials which are 
tailored to exhibit large phase changes. Below the authors demonstrate that 
phase change materials (PCMs) which are
known to switch reproducibly between an amorphous and a crystalline phase, are 
very
promising candidates to achieve a significant oscillation force without a 
change of composition.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1006/1006.4065.pdf
 
Of course we know that phase change can happen with large thermal consequences. 
In short, we have to ask: is nickel hydride a kind of inadvertent PCM, and does 
it’s thermal activity depend on a precise loading of hydrogen, and then 
cyclingaround the phase-change parameter; or indeed does this depend on a 
loading with an isomer of hydrogen instead of plain hydrogen (such as the 
reduced ground state) ?
 
Since we know that in many NiH reactions there are no gammas, but there is a 
rather distinct connection between the thermal anomaly and nickel phase-change, 
then a ZPE hypothesis would be strengthened by showing how higher energy 
photonscan be emitted continuously and anomalously – especially in the IR range 
of 10-20 microns.
 
Since we know that nickel alone will not do this other than in a Mills scenario 
– we have to ask if an inclusion of below ground state hydrogen will act as the 
“antenna for ZPE”, so to speak. This seems to me to be a satisfactory wayto 
move away from a nuclear basis for LENR to a zero point basis. A magnetic 
anomaly seems to fit into a ZPE explanation better than it fits into a nuclear 
explanation.
 
What is needed is falsifiability.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 







Reply via email to