In reply to Roarty, Francis X's message of Wed, 7 Aug 2013 18:23:01 +0000: Hi Fran,
In IRH, the proton orbits the electron. The vastly larger mass of the proton is why the orbit is much smaller. In this state, the proton is essentially in the classical "ground state", so no variation in vacuum density is required. If you take the equation for the radius of the normal H atom, and substitute the mass of the proton for the mass of the electron, you will see what I mean. The energy release upon entering such a state is at least several hundred eV. (I calculate a maximum of 50000 eV). Note however that the state relies upon the electron not being able to move, i.e. it is "stuck in place", and the actual radius of the proton orbit will depend on the degree to which it is "stuck", because the proton actually orbits around the center of mass. The "stuckness" of the electron determines it's apparent mass, and hence the CM radius. (This is the ping pong ball in the corner of the box again. I.e. the electron's real mass doesn't change, but it's apparent mass can be very large, if it's stuck in a rigid lattice. At least that's the only way I can make sense of IRH). BTW the reason that I say it stays shrunk is that it has lost so much energy when formed. In order to expand again it would have to get that energy back again, and unlike you, I don't think energy can be extracted from the ZPE (but I could be proven wrong). New idea (nothing to do with IRH): Perhaps a Hydrinohydride ion (negative) and a proton can orbit one another, analogous to positronium, but with the proton mass substituting for the electron mass? >Hi Robin, > We are at opposite opinions regarding IRH once shrunk... is there any > reason you think IRH would want to stay shrunk? The Puthoff model posits that > virtual particles push the electron away from the nucleus in opposition to > the electrical attraction establishing a balance.. Casimir geometry > suppresses the larger virtual particles reducing this opposition to the > electrons endless pursuit of the proton... This would mean that the orbital > will be pushed back up when the gas atom exits the geometry but in both cases > the orbital is in balance at a ground state established by vacuum density. I > am ok with chemical bonds opposing this transition and can see IRH atoms > forming molecules or ionic compounds that lock these orbital in the shrunken > state even when the geometry is removed but would expect the orbital to > return to equilibrium instantly when in the atomic state. I suspect this > pressure to return to normal ground state would even discount the energy > needed for these atoms to >become monatomic. >Fran [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
