yes, it is all in there, I can find it later, but if you look at his papers, you will see it
the mass of the electron does not increase as the orbits get closer to 1/137 (and as it approaches the speed of light) as it approaches that 1/137 orbit, it becomes more similar to a photon having zero mass, On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 2:52 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > Jeff, do you know whether or not Mills takes special relativity into > consideration in his equations that lead to the excellent match with the > fine structure constant? If he does, how does SR impact the calculation? > There are interesting implications if he does not need to. > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Driscoll <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Tue, Jan 21, 2014 2:17 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory > > you have 3 significant digits for 1/137.12 (i.e. 137) > > while Mills has 9+ significant digits that match the rest mass of the > electron (i.e. 510998.896) and he does it for 5 equations that are > classical and he does it in a logical fashion that a college physics > student would understand, > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 2:12 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > >> From "Quaternion >> Physics<http://books.google.com/books?id=f9IPh4IxteMC&pg=PA46&lpg=PA46&dq=quaternion+fine+structure+constant> >> ": >> >> "In examining the Hydrogen atoms Quantum speed, 1/2(e/q)² = 1/137.12 >> appears and is approximagely equal to α." >> >> Quaternions are the third normed division algebra. >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:40 AM, James Bowery <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Interesting. Do the normed division algebras enter into Mills' theory? >>> >>> If so, I have something to contribute: >>> >>> There may be a mathematical identity between the 4 normed division >>> algebras and the 4 levels of the combinatorial hierarchy. >>> >>> A paper by Stanford researcher Pierre Noyes describing the prediction >>> of cosmological measurements based on the combinatorial hierarchy (which is >>> therein defined): >>> >>> http://slac.stanford.edu/cgi-wrap/getdoc/slac-pub-8779.pdf >>> >>> The reason I am suspicious that there is a connection between the two >>> is the parsimony with which the third level of the combinatorial >>> hierarchy's electroweak interaction can be described by quaternions, and my >>> intuition that the strong interaction may parsimoniously be described by >>> complex numbers. >>> >>> An introduction to Noyes's bitstring physics: >>> >>> http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9707020.pdf >>> >>> wherein he associates the four levels of the combinatorial hierarchy >>> with the four scale constants for the superstrong, strong, electroweak and >>> gravitational interactions respectively >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Jeff Driscoll <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> I tried to summarize a few reasons why I believe Randell Mills's theory >>>> of the atom. >>>> >>>> ============================================== >>>> For decades, physicists have struggled with how to interpret the fine >>>> structure constant, alpha = 1/137.035999 >>>> Physicist Richard Feynman said this decades ago: "It has been a >>>> mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty years ago, and all >>>> good theoretical physicists put this number up on their wall and worry >>>> about it." >>>> Feynman also said: "It's one of the greatest damn mysteries of >>>> physics: A magic number with no understanding by man" >>>> >>>> In my view, the value of the fine structure constant is explained by >>>> Randell Mills's model of the hydrogen atom. >>>> In Mills's model, the principal quantum number n can take on fractional >>>> values with the smallest being n =1/137. For purposes of the following >>>> energy calculations, assume an electron is orbiting around the proton in a >>>> stable orbit at the principal quantum number n = 1/137.035999 (i.e. the >>>> fine structure constant, alpha) and has a radius R based on Mills's >>>> theory. An electron orbiting at this radius R has the following 5 energy >>>> calculations related to it and they *all* equal exactly 510998.896 eV or >>>> the rest mass of the electron (this is to 9+ significant digits!). >>>> The energy equations are: >>>> 1. Resonant energy of the vacuum for a sphere having radius R. >>>> 2. Capacitive energy of a sphere having radius R. >>>> 3. Magnetic energy for an electron orbiting a proton on the infinite >>>> number of "great circles" (as described by Mills) on the surface of a >>>> sphere having radius R. >>>> 4. Planck equation energy for a photon having a wavelength that matches >>>> a sphere having radius R. >>>> 5. Electric potential energy for an electron evaluated at infinity >>>> relative to a sphere having radius R with a proton at the center. >>>> >>>> The amazing thing is that these 5 energy equations above are >>>> classical, meaning no quantum theory is involved and it uses Newtonian >>>> dynamics and Maxwell's equations. The 5 energy equations are exactly the >>>> same as found in physics textbooks. >>>> The energy equations are related to Mills's "Pair Production" (where >>>> a photon is converted into an electron) and to have an organized, logical >>>> theory have such a coincidence where they all equal the rest mass of the >>>> electron would be impossible in my view. >>>> >>>> Mills's equations for the radius of the orbiting electron can be >>>> derived using the same methods as Niels Bohr but with slightly different >>>> postulates. >>>> >>>> 1. Bohr postulated that the momentum of the electron was equal to the >>>> principal quantum number multiplied by the reduced Planck constant for all >>>> stable orbits. Mills postulates that the momentum of the electron is equal >>>> to *only* the reduced Planck constant at all stable orbits (i.e. it is not >>>> a function of principal quantum number). >>>> 2. Bohr postulated that the electric charge experienced by the >>>> electron due to the proton is equal to e (the elementary charge) for all >>>> stable orbits. Mills postulates that the electric charge experienced by the >>>> electron due to the proton *and* the trapped photon is equal to e/n or the >>>> elementary charge divided by the principal quantum number for all stable >>>> orbits. >>>> >>>> You can find out more about Randell Mills's theory at my website here: >>>> >>>> http://zhydrogen.com >>>> >>>> Side note: Mills's lowest allowed orbit is 1/137 not 1/137.035999 and >>>> (I think) the difference between the two numbers is related to a small >>>> magnetic interaction between the electron and the proton. You can see more >>>> detail in Mills's book, Grand Unified Theory of Classical Physics (GUTCP) >>>> which is streamed here: >>>> >>>> http://www.blacklightpower.com/theory-2/book/book-download/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > Jeff Driscoll > 617-290-1998 > -- Jeff Driscoll 617-290-1998
