Mills is in good company when he cites Newton, Maxwell and Einstein. The belief that an electron is located at a tiny point which then rotates around the nucleus is the main problem. As you state, an accelerated charge should always radiate and that most likely is true under most conditions. The beauty of a distributed charge such as Mills is apparently assuming is that each differential point on the orbit occupied by a infinitesimal charge radiates into space just as theory predicts. At the far field, one could theoretically detect that radiation. Fortunately, there is a vector addition of radiated waves from all of the tiny charges around the orbit at every point in far space. The net vector sum of all the components is exactly zero with one exception which is at a frequency of zero radians per second. This zero radian per second field is actually the atomic magnetic field that we measure.
It evades me as to why the early theorists did not build upon the fact that a moving distributed electron charge could prevent radiation and the associated energy loss. Perhaps they were so attached to the point electron concept that they could not move beyond that issue. Now, it appears that Mills has brought the idea back into focus. I sincerely hope that his methods and conclusions are acceptable. The thermodynamic questions that arise as a result of having a sink for energy that only appears to operate in one direction remain. Generally, if energy can be taken from hydrogen to convert it into a hydrino, then the other direction should be possible. You would suspect that some of the hydrinos would extract energy from other atoms and head toward the zero radiation state. I am thinking about a laser medium that can not lase when subject to a large number of photons at its typical output frequency unless a population inversion exists ahead of that event. A thought just occurred to me. Is it not possible to ionize a hydrino with high temperatures, gamma radiation, or other energetic processes? This should be able to return the hydrino back into hydrogen again which should be detected. I suppose that if these processes can impact the hydrinos then they should not be considered dark manner by definition. Considering this situation, one might be inclined to search for hydrogen clouds that seem to appear out of nowhere in space which is subject to strong x-ray or gamma ray illumination. And, of course, any region of space that looks dark in the gamma or x-ray wavelengths might harbor hydrino clouds. These waves should not pass freely. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Mike Carrell <mi...@medleas.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Sun, Jan 19, 2014 10:18 pm Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement Dave, Mills cites Newton, Maxwell and Einstein as reference for his classical theory. QM had its origin in the “ultraviolet catastrophe” of 19th century physics. Accelerated electrons must radiate, according to theory. Orbiting electrons continuously accelerate; there for they should radiate. A heated black body has a well define spectrum – the energy does not radiate in an ultraviolet flash. To resolve this problem, it was assumed that radiation could occur only at specific wavelengths. Upon this foundation an edifice was created which has many problems which theorists simply get used to. Mills study with Haus at MIT led him to new criteria for non-radiation based on the orbitsphere model and the work of Maxwell. It also led him to the possibility of extracting energy from hydrogen atoms by catalysis, which he has demonstrated many times. GUTCP is Mills’ attempt to apply his insight to the great problems of physics. I expect that it will be debated for decades, possibly leading to new insights. Mike Carrell From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2014 9:37 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement http://phys.org/news/2014-01-einstein-wrong.html Why Einstein will never be wrong A new theory does not replace a old theory, in improves it. Einstein improved the old theory of gravity. But we still use the old theory because it is valid in its own context. Mills cannot replace the quantum dynamics, he must replace it with an improved theory that leads to new insights into the quantum world. The old theory of quantum mechanics is still valid its own context, but Mills should only add to it. This is why Heisenberg and quantum mechanics will never be wrong. On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Mike Carrell <mi...@medleas.com> wrote: Dave, I am happy that you are digging in the right places. I’m no expert in this area. I suggest you join the Society for Classical Physics, moderated by Dr. John Farrell [a former mentor of Mills]. Mils monitors this forum and frequently makes terse, cogent comments. Mills asserts that his *classical physics* can do everything better than Quantum Mechanics. I am sure this point will be argued for decades. Read the introductory sections of Vol. 1 of GUTCP. The SCP is a place for those who do homework, not just hacking with misunderstanding. Mike Carrell From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2014 2:19 AM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement Mills states: The BEC is incorrectly interpreted as a single large atom having a corresponding probability wave function of quantum mechanics. Since excitation occurs in units of ¥ in order of to conserve angular momentum as shown previously for electronic (Chapter 2), vibrational (Chapter 11), rotational (Chapter 12), and translational excitation (Chapter 3) and Bose Einstein statistics arise from an underlying deterministic physics (Chapter 24), this state comprised of an ensemble of individual atoms is predicted classically using known equations [110]. As in the case of the coherent state of photons in a laser cavity (Chapter 4), the coherency of the BEC actually disproves the inherent Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) of quantum mechanics since the atomic positions and energies are precisely determined simultaneously. Furthermore, it is possible to form a BEC comprising molecules in addition to atoms [111] wherein the molecules lack zero order vibration in contradiction to the HUP. The classical physics underlying Bose Einstein statistics was covered in the Statistical Mechanics section. These are some of my favorite ideas wahed away by Mills theory. It must be possible under Mills theory to form a BEC out of ground state hydrinos. Are there ground state hydrinos? These things are Atoms( bosons) aren't they? Let 's see an experiment that produces a hydrino BEC and look for absolute certainty and determinism. That would be something to see. On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 11:48 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: Mike, I honestly hope that Mills has come up with a new theory that eliminates the probabilities of quantum mechanics. Do I read that correctly, or does his theory still allow for quantum like unknowns? It would seem that much of the recent quantum computing, etc. fairly well establishes that qbits exist. What is your take on them? Dave -----Original Message----- From: Mike Carrell <mi...@medleas.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Sat, Jan 18, 2014 9:50 pm Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement Beauty indeed comes from truth, ad Mills’ GUTCP is very beautiful. What is easily missed is the tradition that a pioneer in science should carefully document his discovery so others can follow, and that he should address the principal features of accepted knowledge if his discovery impacts those features. This *is* what GUTCP is all about. Many have attempted a GUT and failed, including Einstein. An introduction and the orbitsphere derivation are in Vol.1, along with much else. Experimental evidence for hydrinos is outlined in the Technical Presentation on the website, with details in journal papers. The salient beautiful feature of Mills’ work is that he has a consistent system of mathematical description over 85 orders of magnitude using only measured constants. This supersedes the complexities of Quantum Mechanics, which has been fashionable for the last century. Acceptance of Mills’ work may be quite gradual. Einstein, for example got his Nobel Prize not or Relativity, but for earlier elucidation of the photoelectric effect. Mike Carrell From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:16 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement Beauty comes from truth. On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 5:14 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 18 Jan 2014 16:47:17 -0500: Hi, [snip] >We must accept that hydrinos exist because Mills has experimentally >demonstrated them. But we do not need to accept the 1700 pages of theory >that Mill uses to explain them. There are other explanations that are >easier to swallow. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. ;) > >http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.5194v1.pdf > >Fractional spin and charge is a result of delocalization of the electron in >strongly correlated systems. > > > >The spin and charge seem to wander away from the electron in condensed >matter systems do to wave function sharing among many electrons. > > > >It is well known, this fractional spin and charge causes problems in >chemistry associated with the dissociation of molecular ions, >polarizabilities, barrier heights, magnetic properties, fundamental >band-gaps and strongly-correlated systems. > > > >Could what Mills sees is a electron delocalization condition in a strongly >correlated chemical system? > > > >The paper above lays the conditions for fractional spins, charge and >orbitals. > > > > > > >On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 4:30 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: > >> In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 16 Jan 2014 20:38:39 -0500: >> Hi, >> [snip] >> >> I meant individual atoms, and I realize that clusters would probably have >> somewhat different energy levels, however it would be very coincidental if >> these >> exactly matched Hydrino energy levels. >> The author of the paper on IRH, that has previously been mentioned on this >> list, >> claims that it has only one level, whereas the Hydrino has over a hundred. >> >> >Don't you mean to say that Rydberg clusters don't have multiple energy >> >levels and characteristic transition energies, which are seen in Hydrino >> >experiments? >> > >> > >> >On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 7:08 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: >> > >> >> In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 16 Jan 2014 16:26:06 -0500: >> >> Hi, >> >> >How does Mills theory distinguish been orbitals in a atom verses >> orbitals >> >> >in small atomic Rydberg cluster of 10 atoms or less. I say the Mills >> >> >experiments can't. >> >> [snip] >> >> Rydberg atoms don't have multiple energy levels and characteristic >> >> transition >> >> energies, which are seen in Hydrino experiments. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> >> >> Robin van Spaandonk >> >> >> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html >> >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Robin van Spaandonk >> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html >> >> Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html ________________________________________________________________________ This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department. ________________________________________________________________________ This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department. ________________________________________________________________________ This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department.
