If charge is understood as a DC current loop perhaps it can shed light on this:
http://phys.org/news/2013-03-electrons-cuprate-superconductors-defy-convention.html Harry On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 2:06 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 these virtual >> pairs streaming thru our spatial dimensions perpendicular to space.. [snip] >> Atoms >> therefore constitute open systems engaged in dynamic interactions with the >> surrounding >> vacuum states. Specifically, the on net radiationless characteristic of the >> ground state is shown here to derive from particle‐vacuum interactions >> in which a dynamic equilibrium is established between radiation emission >> due to particle acceleration, and compensatory absorption from the >> zero‐point fluctuations of the vacuum electromagnetic field. Thus, the vacuum >> field is formally necessary for the stability of atomic structures, and >> this underlying principle therefore constitutes an important feature of >> quantum ground states. [/snip] . >> Fran >> >> _____________________________________________ >> *From:* MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:[email protected]<[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* <http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.1952.pdf> >> >> And his first paper on this in ’87: >> *http://www.earthtech.org/publications/PRDv35_3266.pdf*<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 hydrogen atom 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 absorption from 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* <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]* <[email protected]>] >> *Sent:* Saturday, August 03, 2013 7:13 PM >> *To:* *[email protected]* <[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 larger virtual 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 speed the 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 a nano 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 are temporally 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 measure as 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 always seems 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 electron is 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 of Casimir 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 energy required 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 Casimir >> force. This may even be close to the Mills animations… nice hypothesis by >> Jones! >> Fran >> _____________________________________________ >> *From:* MarkI-ZeroPoint >> [*mailto:[email protected]*<[email protected]>] >> >> *Sent:* Saturday, August 03, 2013 1:04 PM >> *To:* *[email protected]* <[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 some of 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 Casimir cavity… am I >> behind the 8-ball on this? Has this been proposed yet? >> >> -Mark Iverson >> >> _____________________________________________ >> *From:* Jones Beene [*mailto:[email protected]* <[email protected]>] >> *Sent:* Saturday, August 03, 2013 7:23 AM >> *To:* *[email protected]* <[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 it change 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 known connection 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 >> *<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*<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 cycling around 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 photons can 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 way to 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. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >
