In general, Mills is weak in the explanation of optical theory and nanoparticle theory. I looked for his explanation for evanescent wave formation and the whispering gallery wave, also Fano resonance. He does not cover soliton or plasmoid formation. My guess is that these well-known Items do not fit into his framework. Shock waves are not covered there either. There is nothing on nano-particles micro particles or dust.
Many of these concepts that I am interested in are not mentioned. He is not well balanced and all inclusive for a theory of everything. If he has blind spots, things can slip through and misinterpretations made. On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:47 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you remember, Milley discovered superconductivity in small cavities. He > says that protons were in these cavities but who can tell really. > > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:42 AM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com>wrote: > >> I see what you mean Axil. Unless the nano cavity is a super conductor it >> should loose energy to resistive walls like a normal cavity resonator. In >> time, the total energy trapped in a normal cavity must decay to zero. Of >> course, a very high Q cavity could maintain much of the original photon >> energy for a long time. >> >> Is there evidence that the nano cavities that you describe are super >> conductive? >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> Sent: Fri, Jan 24, 2014 12:34 am >> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement >> >> Mills may be mistaking nanoparticles for hydrinos. Nanoparticles can be >> excited by a single photon. That incoming excitation energy is relaxed by >> a broadband spectrum of many photons as the free electrons orbiting the >> surface of the nanoparticles reemit the energy of excitation. >> >> Broadband emission spectrum is a telltale sign of the presence of >> nanoparticles when the material is excited by a monochromatic photon >> source.. >> >> Reference, >> >> >> http://www2.hu-berlin.de/chemie/agrad/paper/2007/10.1088-0957-4484-18-35-355702.pdf >> These clusters exhibit an efficient white multiphoton-induced >> luminescence during NIR Ti:sapphire femtosecond laser excitation. >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:54 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com>wrote: >> >>> Eric, the broadband emission of photons does seem a little problematic. >>> I have come to expect the energy levels of atoms to be so well defined >>> that accurate clocks are built using the transitions. Are you sure that >>> you accurately understand the source of that radiation? It would seem >>> more reasonable for the energy to be transferred as a well defined chunk >>> that is accepted by the catalyst. The activity of the catalyst as a result >>> of the transfer could be the source for the wide band radiation. >>> >>> This is just my way to justify the emissions. Mills may likely have a >>> different opinion of the events. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> >>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >>> Sent: Thu, Jan 23, 2014 10:06 pm >>> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 1:20 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: >>> >>> Unless I'm mistaken, the reason for non-radiation is that there is a >>>> lower limit >>>> to radiation as a phenomenon. >>> >>> >>> According to the presentation at zhydrogen [1], when the electron >>> "spirals down" to a more redundant level, there is a broadband emission of >>> photons. Presumably at least some photons are not trapped in this >>> scenario. Assuming I haven't misunderstood an important point, is that >>> claim incompatible with what you're saying here? >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >>> [1] >>> http://zhydrogen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/BLP-presentation.pdf >>> >>> >> >
