Miley has measures zero resistance in the Nano cavity that holds the hydrogen, So the hydrogen is superconducting. That has to be a BEC. How does this experimental finding impact Ed Storms theory? Has Ed included this dot in his collection?
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe instead of metallic 1D hydrogen, it's a Vibrational 1D Luttinger > Liquid BEC forming. A V1DLLBEC. > > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Alain Sepeda <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> maybe some connexions, but Hydroton is a 1D object, constrained in a >> lattice defect... metallic 1D hydrogen... >> >> Rydberg states is rather talking of excitation of the electrons.. >> maybe is rydberg state of atoms in a coherent 1D chain of metallic >> hydrogen... >> >> maybe is is a 1D rydberg matter... need more data >> >> >> 2014-07-20 21:22 GMT+02:00 Axil Axil <[email protected]>: >> >> Why is the hydroton different from Rydberg hydrogen crystals(aka matter)? >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks. Good interview. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The main complaint from the non-specialists - which will insure that it >>>> gets few viewers - is lack of graphics. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Which is unrealistic of course, since who (especially among volunteers) >>>> has the resources for a graphics artist these days? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I was going to suggest looping parts of an existing video, without the >>>> sound, like this one >>>> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VD4hj2PmkoY >>>> >>>> They are supposedly a for-profit company who might agree - for a little >>>> joint PR. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Anyway - If anything needs to be cleared up it is the “hydroton”. >>>> Everything in the Storms theory pretty much depends on this hybrid concept. >>>> It is a hypothetical “chemical structure” without any precedence in >>>> chemistry or physics. To me, it looks like a strained attempt to shoehorn >>>> Hagelstein’s ideas about lack of gammas into fractofusion, together with >>>> something vaguely related to Mills. Ed has expressed before that he does >>>> not like his concept being referred to as fractofusion…. but he has this >>>> love/hate thing with trying to draw the line between hot and cold fusion is >>>> a peculiar way that probably cannot be valid. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> My response is that if walks like a duck and quacks like a duck …. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Well, anyway - we ought to start a new thread on the hydroton when >>>> enough readers have gotten hold of the book. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Jones >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Foks0904 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> For anyone who has 50 minutes and an interest in cold fusion theory. We >>>> discuss both Ed's theory specifically and the theory landscape generally -- >>>> and get into a number of other topics in between. Thanks for listening: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> http://coldfusionnow.org/interview-with-dr-edmund-storms-on-lenr-theory/ >>>> >>> >>> >> >
