If static a charge is really a looping DC current, it resembles the current in a superconductor since it would not dissipate. However, unlike superconductors, the absence of resistance does not need to be explained in terms of other particles since it would be innate property of this current. Therefore it would be appropriate to call these entities super-currents.
If electrons are super-currents then the phenomena of superconductivity, although it is extraordinary in terms of our current knowledge, will not seem astounding. Instead, it is the ordinary phenomena electrical resistance that seems astounding. Harry On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 12:00 PM, H Veeder <[email protected]> wrote: > 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. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
