yes, there is a charge density that rotates on the surface, scroll down 1/2 way on this:
http://www.blacklightpower.com/theory-2/theory/atomic-theory/ On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:42 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike, > > I have no doubt that an electron that is spread into the two dimensional > orbitsphere would not radiate. I think that the exclusion of the radial > charge current components are not necessary for this to be true. I read > many pages in Mill's well written document and came across an equation > where he states that any inclusion of a radial current would lead to > radiation and I am confident that is not true under certain circumstances. > As I discussed earlier, the only requirement is that the currents > associated with the orbitsphere would need to be continuous and of a DC > like nature. It is easy to demonstrate that a steady flowing charge that > is not reversing or changing magnitude with time at every point in space > will not lead to radiation. A magnetic field will be formed by the flowing > current, but no far field RF radiation pattern will be established. > > Perhaps you can clarify one point which so far has escaped my > understanding of Mill's theory. Does his calculated orbitsphere change > pattern with time under stable non radiation conditions? A simple way to > put this question is: Does the stable orbitsphere have an AC component > associated with it? I would assume that you would have the answer to this > simple question if you understand his theory in great detail. I can > attempt to clarify what I am asking further if you wish as I realize that > the terms I am using may not match those that you are familiar with. > > The main point that I am attempting to make is that any smooth DC, 3 > dimensional current pattern will not lead to far field energy > escape(radiation). There are an infinite number of complex 3d shapes that > are possible if the only constraint is to prevent radiation of photons. I > have not analyzed the case where an AC current flow is required, so that > might force the 2 dimensional patterns as calculated by Mills. So far I > have not seen evidence that his electron orbitsphere is of an AC nature > instead of the DC. Can you verify that he calculates AC flow (charge being > a function of time at any spatial point) in these patterns? > > I am not attempting to discredit Mills in any way, and as a matter of fact > would be thrilled to find that his work could simplify the many > complexities of quantum mechanics. I just seek a better understanding of > how his theory works and the nature of his electron orbitspheres. So far I > have concluded that they are DC like and I hope someone can correct this > belief if it does not accurately reflect his theory. Can anyone help > answer this question? > > It is interesting that the BLP experiments show some of the expected lines > from deep space radiation. That certainly might qualify as evidence in > support of hydrinos. I hope to find time to look into that further since > the other competing claims as to what constitutes dark matter seems like a > long stretch. I find it easier to suspect that some error in measurement > or understanding of gravitation or space is more likely than those. > > Can Mills bring us a bottle of hydrinos to analyze? They should generate > pressure and have weight just as normal hydrogen even though it would be > impossible to see them with normal illumination. Perhaps someone has seen > a collection of this material in the past that I am unaware of. If, on the > other hand, no one can collect hydrinos for measurement, then their > existence is suspect. Can a loss of mass attributed to the formation of > hydrinos and their subsequent escape from the system be shown? This would > be strong evidence as well. One would think that a relatively large > amount of hydrino formation must take place to generate a significant > amount of chemical energy especially at the [1/4] state and the loss of > this much mass, due to diffusion, easy to measure. > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Carrell <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Sun, Jan 19, 2014 7:02 pm > Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: BLP's announcement > > Dave, I suggest you [free] download Vol. 1 of Mills GUTCP and follow > the mathematical derivation of the orbitsphere contain therein. Be aware > that the notion of ‘zero thickness’ has been debated to death in past > years. Be aware also that Dr. Connet, a mathematician and department head > attacked Mills with savage rhetoric over years until Mills silenced him by > pointing out Connet’s errors in reading Mills’ analysis. Connet conceded > that ills work has merit. > > As far as ‘dark matter’ is concerned, look in the website for an image of > a star field, and look carefully at the papers cited below the image. > Essentially, hydrinos are created by stellar processes. They have mass, but > do not radiate, which defines ‘dark matter’. The reactions creating > hydrinos **do** radiate and are seen in telescopes as ‘unknown sources’. > But, the same lines have been seen in BLP experiments producing hydrinos. > > Mike Carrell > > *From:* David Roberson [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]?>] > *Sent:* Friday, January 17, 2014 2:48 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Re: BLP's announcement > > My understanding of fields is that the shell could be any thickness and > that the electron cloud (I refer to the continuous charge field here) could > occupy any three dimensional shape in space and still not radiate. The > distribution does however determine the external magnetic field that is > generated by the effective current flow. Motion of the charge distribution > must be taking place for an external magnetic field to be present. > > I was reading one of the papers listed on your site about what was real > and unreal when I saw the 2 dimensional requirement. Do you recall any > theory by Mills that suggests that radiation from the electron orbital can > be suppressed if the motion of the electron charge is anything but constant > and of a DC nature? My suspicion is that it is not possible for an overall > balance to be present in the far field region unless the current is DC. > Any acceleration of charge generates a far field pattern and only an equal > and opposite directed acceleration can balance that out. > > I visualize a loop of wire when I think of similar behavior. Everyone > suspects that an electron circulating around that loop is subject to > acceleration and will generate a far field radiation pattern. My model > says that this is indeed the case. But as more electrons are added to the > wire, better balance occurs. Eventually, when a continuous stream of them > are circulating around the loop, a complete balance occurs. Any direction > that is probed in the far field region will be completely balanced at every > point in space as long as an extremely large number are looping. This > effect has one hole in it which is a steady DC magnetic field. The DC > field can be very complex in 3 dimensional spatial shape which is > established by the motion of the electrons path. > > One interesting complication is that the magnetic field must consist of at > least 2 poles from which it emanates. This ensures that the field fall off > quickly with distance and that its total energy is well contained. > > Dave > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Driscoll <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Fri, Jan 17, 2014 12:36 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: BLP's announcement > he does give a thickness for the electron shell - it is very small, > the thickness is equal to the Schwarzschild radius. The Schwarzschild > radius equation applied to the mass of the electron is much smaller than > the diameter of the electron shell. > I cut and pasted this from one of his pdf's - the equations are not > shown in this email, but it is from page 8 of this: > > > http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/theory/theorypapers/Classical_Quantum_Mechanics_102804.pdf > ============================== > quoting from pdf above: > The orbitsphere has zero thickness, but in order that the speed of light > is a constant maximum in any frame > including that of the gravitational field that propagates out as a > light-wave front at particle production, it gives rise > to a spacetime dilation equal to 2π times the Newtonian gravitational or > Schwarzschild radius > (equation deleted) > according to Eqs. (178) and (202). This corresponds to a spacetime > dilation of > (equation deleted) > Although the orbitsphere does not occupy space in the third spatial > dimension, its mass discontinuity effectively “displaces” spacetime wherein > the spacetime dilation can be considered a “thickness” associated with its > gravitational field > ============================ > I have a *lot* of detail on Mill's theory at my website > http://zhydrogen.com/ > > Jeff > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:21 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> > wrote: > I also find what appears to be a problem with the theory. Mills makes an > assumption in the very beginning of his analysis that the electron orbit > sphere must be of zero thickness with no radial component if it is to exist > without radiation of electromagnetic waves. This is not true and can > easily be demonstrated in an experiment. You can construct any three > dimensional wire configuration you like containing the 2 dimensional > surface that Mills assumes as well as any sections which head into and out > of the third dimension he rejects. The only constraint is that the current > flowing through this total structure does not change the charge > distribution with time. > > The net result of a system that I am describing is a DC current flowing > through the structure. It does not require any restriction upon its loop > path, contrary to what Mills assumes. Perhaps he should go back to his > original equations and see how this relaxed requirement impacts his model. > There may be implications for the behavior of the hydrino orbitals that he > predicts. It is refreshing to review how he is able to apply classical > theory to the atomic realm and I would love to see quantum theory replaced > with a more deterministic model. That is a long shot. > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Fri, Jan 17, 2014 10:33 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: BLP's announcement > It seems to me that there is a fundamental contradiction in the Mills > theory. This theory is purported to be a universally applied theory of the > atom, but it requires the mediation of a catalyst to appear. > The requirement for a catalyst adds consideration of the chemically > based mediation of other electrons associated with the catalyst to affect > the quantum mechanical behavior of the atom in question. > > The mills hydrino theory is purported to be an atomic theory, but it is > really a condensed matter theory. In other words, the Mills theory cannot > rightfully describe the behavior of a standalone atom in terms of orbits of > its electrons. > Furthermore, the mathematical description of hydrino atom's behavior > never includes the interactions of neighboring electrons and their > influence on the hydrino atom. > In the explanation of his theory to the best of my understanding, Mills > never mentions how the actions and influences of the electrons that are in > the environment of the hydrino atom effect or cause the hydrino atom > > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 3:42 PM, JeffD <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have a website that goes into the details of BLP's theory: > > http://zhydrogen.com > > I have one PDF (near the top of the home page and shown below) that I made > that shows interesting calculations dealing with the hydrogen atom - and is > one of the reasons that I believe Mills's theory is correct. > > http://zhydrogen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/BLP-e-energy.pdf > I still believe in BLP even though I tried to replicate their CIHT > device last year without success (this is the non-plasma, non-MHD > version). > > http://zhydrogen.com/?page_id=620 > > Jeff > > On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 10:37:50 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote: > This, this time seems to be remarkable progress- > if true: > > > http://www.financialpost.com/markets/news/BlackLight+Power+Announces+Game+Changing+Achievement+Generation+Millions/9384649/story.html > > Let's see- Mike Carrell remained BLP's faithful supporter. > Not LENR, but energy > > Peter > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > > > > > -- > Jeff Driscoll > 617-290-1998 > > ________________________________________________________________________ > This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. > Department. > -- Jeff Driscoll 617-290-1998
