[Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
Here is a current story on the magic of gravitational lensing. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27118405 At the cosmological level - light is bent and amplified by gravity, appearing far brighter than it is - due to a large galaxy being located directly in our line of sight. The analogy for spinplasmonics, and it is only an analogy - is that an extremely large but localized magnetic field can act as a lens for IR photons. When a monatomic atom of hydrogen becomes densified (via spinplasmonics) as a DDL particle with the electron orbital at only a few Fermi in distance, can it act as a lens for photons? If so, you heard it first on Vortex :-) Here is the oft-cited paper on DDL with calculations. http://www.fulviofrisone.com/attachments/article/359/Electron%20Transitions% 20on%20Deep%20Dirac%20Levels%20II.pdf With this kind of "shrinkage" (i.e. diminution in geometry) for the hydrogen atom, the inverse square relationship makes both the magnetic and electric fields of the DDL comparatively immense. The irony of that happenstance - for LENR is that the near-field electrostatic repulsive forces between two DDL atoms could make the possibility of nuclear fusion vastly less probable, while at the same time acting as a ultra-strong magnifying lens for photons. Photons from 3-space could be lensed into one dimension, where they are upshifted and reflected back into 3-space with added energy - even when the Dirac sea itself is not disrupted. That would be an alternative explanation for excess non-nuclear energy to appear in those reactions where little gamma radiation is seen. <>
RE: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
Jones, I like your 2nd verse [snip] Photons from 3-space could be lensed into one dimension, where they are upshifted and reflected back into 3-space with added energy - even when the Dirac sea itself is not disrupted. That would be an alternative explanation for excess non-nuclear energy to appear in those reactions where little gamma radiation is seen. [/snip] and agree with the sentiment of the first [snip] The irony of that happenstance - for LENR is that the near-field electrostatic repulsive forces between two DDL atoms could make the possibility of nuclear fusion vastly less probable, while at the same time acting as a ultra-strong magnifying lens for photons.[/snip] but not the method suggested.. Would not Naudt's relativistic hydrogen provide the same? That is the local atoms would be unaware of their transformation and their attraction and or repulsion would be unchanged and based on only local differences in velocity like 2 aircraft caught in the same wind pattern the relative velocity to the stationary Ni would be changed to the point of dilation enabling the DDL but since it is the space time that the gas atoms occupy which is being modified by the Ni geometry all the gas atoms in a local region are blissfully unaware of their dilation relative to each other. Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 12:21 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP Here is a current story on the magic of gravitational lensing. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27118405 At the cosmological level - light is bent and amplified by gravity, appearing far brighter than it is - due to a large galaxy being located directly in our line of sight. The analogy for spinplasmonics, and it is only an analogy - is that an extremely large but localized magnetic field can act as a lens for IR photons. When a monatomic atom of hydrogen becomes densified (via spinplasmonics) as a DDL particle with the electron orbital at only a few Fermi in distance, can it act as a lens for photons? If so, you heard it first on Vortex :) Here is the oft-cited paper on DDL with calculations. http://www.fulviofrisone.com/attachments/article/359/Electron%20Transitions%20on%20Deep%20Dirac%20Levels%20II.pdf With this kind of "shrinkage" (i.e. diminution in geometry) for the hydrogen atom, the inverse square relationship makes both the magnetic and electric fields of the DDL comparatively immense. The irony of that happenstance - for LENR is that the near-field electrostatic repulsive forces between two DDL atoms could make the possibility of nuclear fusion vastly less probable, while at the same time acting as a ultra-strong magnifying lens for photons. Photons from 3-space could be lensed into one dimension, where they are upshifted and reflected back into 3-space with added energy - even when the Dirac sea itself is not disrupted. That would be an alternative explanation for excess non-nuclear energy to appear in those reactions where little gamma radiation is seen.
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
- Original Message - From: Roarty, Francis X To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 12:14 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP Jones, I like your 2nd verse [snip] Photons from 3-space could be lensed into one dimension, where they are upshifted and reflected back into 3-space with added energy - even when the Dirac sea itself is not disrupted. That would be an alternative explanation for excess non-nuclear energy to appear in those reactions where little gamma radiation is seen. [/snip] and agree with the sentiment of the first [snip] The irony of that happenstance - for LENR is that the near-field electrostatic repulsive forces between two DDL atoms could make the possibility of nuclear fusion vastly less probable, while at the same time acting as a ultra-strong magnifying lens for photons.[/snip] but not the method suggested.. Would not Naudt's relativistic hydrogen provide the same? That is the local atoms would be unaware of their transformation and their attraction and or repulsion would be unchanged and based on only local differences in velocity like 2 aircraft caught in the same wind pattern the relative velocity to the stationary Ni would be changed to the point of dilation enabling the DDL but since it is the space time that the gas atoms occupy which is being modified by the Ni geometry all the gas atoms in a local region are blissfully unaware of their dilation relative to each other. Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 12:21 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP Here is a current story on the magic of gravitational lensing. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27118405 At the cosmological level - light is bent and amplified by gravity, appearing far brighter than it is - due to a large galaxy being located directly in our line of sight. The analogy for spinplasmonics, and it is only an analogy - is that an extremely large but localized magnetic field can act as a lens for IR photons. When a monatomic atom of hydrogen becomes densified (via spinplasmonics) as a DDL particle with the electron orbital at only a few Fermi in distance, can it act as a lens for photons? If so, you heard it first on Vortex J Here is the oft-cited paper on DDL with calculations. http://www.fulviofrisone.com/attachments/article/359/Electron%20Transitions%20on%20Deep%20Dirac%20Levels%20II.pdf With this kind of "shrinkage" (i.e. diminution in geometry) for the hydrogen atom, the inverse square relationship makes both the magnetic and electric fields of the DDL comparatively immense. The irony of that happenstance - for LENR is that the near-field electrostatic repulsive forces between two DDL atoms could make the possibility of nuclear fusion vastly less probable, while at the same time acting as a ultra-strong magnifying lens for photons. Photons from 3-space could be lensed into one dimension, where they are upshifted and reflected back into 3-space with added energy - even when the Dirac sea itself is not disrupted. That would be an alternative explanation for excess non-nuclear energy to appear in those reactions where little gamma radiation is seen.
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
Fran-- "all the gas atoms in a local region are blissfully unaware of their dilation relative to each other." This sounds like the opposite of a quantum system--maybe an "anti quantum" system. I think that its more likely that the Dirac Sea includes more than just positrons and electrons in a one dimensional array. Scalar fields are much simpler than three dimensional one's. Furthermore, such a scalar may not be really scalar at very small dimensions, for example between 10^-18 cm and 10^-35 cm. Of course below 10^-35 cm there is no concern. That's the nature of the one dimensional field where all particles can blissfully ignore each other from 0 to 10^-35 cm. We should call that scalar field, Plank's virtual string field. Plank and Dirac, I guess, knew each other, kinda like you and Jones do. Bob - Original Message - From: Roarty, Francis X To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 12:14 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP Jones, I like your 2nd verse [snip] Photons from 3-space could be lensed into one dimension, where they are upshifted and reflected back into 3-space with added energy - even when the Dirac sea itself is not disrupted. That would be an alternative explanation for excess non-nuclear energy to appear in those reactions where little gamma radiation is seen. [/snip] and agree with the sentiment of the first [snip] The irony of that happenstance - for LENR is that the near-field electrostatic repulsive forces between two DDL atoms could make the possibility of nuclear fusion vastly less probable, while at the same time acting as a ultra-strong magnifying lens for photons.[/snip] but not the method suggested.. Would not Naudt's relativistic hydrogen provide the same? That is the local atoms would be unaware of their transformation and their attraction and or repulsion would be unchanged and based on only local differences in velocity like 2 aircraft caught in the same wind pattern the relative velocity to the stationary Ni would be changed to the point of dilation enabling the DDL but since it is the space time that the gas atoms occupy which is being modified by the Ni geometry all the gas atoms in a local region are blissfully unaware of their dilation relative to each other. Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 12:21 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP Here is a current story on the magic of gravitational lensing. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27118405 At the cosmological level - light is bent and amplified by gravity, appearing far brighter than it is - due to a large galaxy being located directly in our line of sight. The analogy for spinplasmonics, and it is only an analogy - is that an extremely large but localized magnetic field can act as a lens for IR photons. When a monatomic atom of hydrogen becomes densified (via spinplasmonics) as a DDL particle with the electron orbital at only a few Fermi in distance, can it act as a lens for photons? If so, you heard it first on Vortex J Here is the oft-cited paper on DDL with calculations. http://www.fulviofrisone.com/attachments/article/359/Electron%20Transitions%20on%20Deep%20Dirac%20Levels%20II.pdf With this kind of "shrinkage" (i.e. diminution in geometry) for the hydrogen atom, the inverse square relationship makes both the magnetic and electric fields of the DDL comparatively immense. The irony of that happenstance - for LENR is that the near-field electrostatic repulsive forces between two DDL atoms could make the possibility of nuclear fusion vastly less probable, while at the same time acting as a ultra-strong magnifying lens for photons. Photons from 3-space could be lensed into one dimension, where they are upshifted and reflected back into 3-space with added energy - even when the Dirac sea itself is not disrupted. That would be an alternative explanation for excess non-nuclear energy to appear in those reactions where little gamma radiation is seen.
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
How does one envision a 1/2 spin particle which must go through 720 degrees of rotation to return to it's starting position?
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
If its in a line it must turn around twice. One turn only lets it go to - 1/2. - Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" To: Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP How does one envision a 1/2 spin particle which must go through 720 degrees of rotation to return to it's starting position?
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
Do you guys think it is a coincidence the aurel ovals show up over the Earth's magnetic poles? http://spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov/weekly/WeekV.pdf Or that the most complex halos, which I think are actually gravitational lensing occur at the poles of the Earth? http://darkmattersalot.com/2014/04/19/if-we-only-had-a-brane-wait-we-do/ Or that the most significant halos show up in jet streams connected to hurricanes? http://darkmattersalot.com/2013/04/22/today-we-hunt-for-cosmic-strings/ Welcome to mama earth brane ! Brane decay precedes tooth decay... Boy has physics f'd up. Stewart On Friday, April 25, 2014, Bob Cook wrote: > > > If its in a line it must turn around twice. One turn only lets it go to - > 1/2. > > > - Original Message - From: "Terry Blanton" > To: > Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 1:03 PM > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP > > > How does one envision a 1/2 spin particle which must go through 720 >> degrees of rotation to return to it's starting position? >> >> >> >
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Bob Cook wrote: > > > If its in a line it must turn around twice. I'm sorry. I don't understand. Maybe you could expound a bit?
RE: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
-Original Message- From: Terry Blanton > How does one envision a 1/2 spin particle which must go through 720 degrees of rotation to return to its starting position? The fizzix perfess'nuls say that this should not even be attempted, as it will possibly drive one to insanity. That does not stop the average vortician, since he or she is already well advanced beyond that status. Anyway - the way I envision this - as a 3D image (which could be animated if desired) is actually fairly straightforward - beginning with a "figure 8" pathway - which is representative of an average-path in what is really becomes a "smear"… but we can look at averages, for now. The center point where the lines cross will be designated as N for nucleus. This is not unlike a p orbital at this stage, but this is only the start of a merger of S&P, so to speak. 8 If the electron, although a point - has its own virtual axis with its own point polarity (and no one can show that it does not) then if the orbital starts at N it must traverse through 720 degrees to return to N with the same starting polarity, assuming it follows an average path. Never mind that the presence of the "real nucleus" is problematic for achieving the 720 degrees. We will deal with that later. Next, imagine rotating that same figure 8 which is now 2D, around an axis which goes through N to create a 3D shape. What you end up with is a special kind of spheroid called a horn torus, which is a torus with no hole – and it that looks roughly spherical. But the horn torus still has the problem of intersecting the nucleus. Therefore - what we really want to imagine is what is called a spindle torus, which now has two deflection points over and under the polarity of the real nucleus. The electron path would not need to intersect the nucleus of a spindle torus. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SpindleTorus.html This spindle torus is even more spherical, and an average electron path can take either Y at the deflection points. Thus, we can accommodate both a virtual p and s orbital with this same general conception, and we can provide an electron smear by assuming that we are only talking about average pathways and we can provide 720 degrees of rotation. OK – not a perfect visualization, but it works for me … your experience may vary. Importantly - it gets one away from Mills' brain-dead model of an orbitsphere as being the a useful alternative. LOL. <>
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 7:15 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > OK – not a perfect visualization, but it works for me … your experience may > vary. Good. I re-found this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYBqIRM8GiY especially the candle dance toward the end.
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
Another one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fjtCgBsOJI On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 7:15 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > >> OK – not a perfect visualization, but it works for me … your experience may >> vary. > > Good. > > I re-found this: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYBqIRM8GiY > > especially the candle dance toward the end.
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
And this one, kinda like you describe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cR4idek1Uo On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 7:33 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > Another one: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fjtCgBsOJI > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 7:15 PM, Jones Beene wrote: >> >>> OK – not a perfect visualization, but it works for me … your experience may >>> vary. >> >> Good. >> >> I re-found this: >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYBqIRM8GiY >> >> especially the candle dance toward the end.
RE: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
That's cool. I was attempting a bit of humor, but who knows what is real and what is spin? I am pretty sure of one thing. It's turtles all the way down... -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton And this one, kinda like you describe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cR4idek1Uo
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > That's cool. I was attempting a bit of humor, but who knows what is real and > what is spin? > > I am pretty sure of one thing. > > It's turtles all the way down... I was amused! I envision certain configurations of energetic electrons acting as a pump moving energy into our 3-space thanks to biased spin.
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
Rabbits. It's a rabbit hole. Run Rabbits Run https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruiYuFk3v74 On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > That's cool. I was attempting a bit of humor, but who knows what is real > and what is spin? > > I am pretty sure of one thing. > > It's turtles all the way down... > > -Original Message- > From: Terry Blanton > > And this one, kinda like you describe: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cR4idek1Uo > > > >
Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:54 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > Rabbits. It's a rabbit hole. Run Rabbits Run The Pulse DVD is on my shelf! If it comes out in Blu Ray . . . In the words of K: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3OTEdZkBaQ#t=54
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP
Hi Bob, my point has always been that the Ni geometry is the quantum contribution not the DDL hydrogen - The Ni geometry suppresses virtual particles in a local region based on Casimir geometry independent of whether the gas atoms are present or not. The anomalous energy is actually the same zero point/HUP that keeps helium from freezing solid at 0 kelvin. The COE caveat that gas motion energy is unexploitable is based on the fact that these breaches in isotropy normally occur only below the Planck scale averaging out long before the scale of physical matter and it is my position that if the isotropy is really being broken by Casimir geometry as some papers have indicated then these regions are large enough to react with physical matter in a biased and exploitable manner. That said if you introduce gas atoms into these regions of broken isotropy they will experience different vacuum densities in local regions that vary in opposition to the normal square law of our macro isotropy and that this difference should be exploitable - cancelling the caveat of COE with respect to gas motion. This is really a poor mans time machine changing vacuum density without a deep gravity well or near C spatial displacement albeit only on a nano scale and suppressing the density instead of compressing it. Jan Naudts proposed the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen back in 2005 but comparison to the hydrogen escaping the suns corona was a red herring for many because near C hydrogen is a "Positive equivalent acceleration" [intersecting with more virtual particles and compressing], while suppressing virtual particles with geometry is "Negative equivalent acceleration " accelerating time from our perspective instead of the slowing we have come to accept for compression like the Twin Paradox. There are claims of radioactive decay anomalies that would fit this relativistic theory of casimir effect and it may even be the basis for catalytic action as mere geometry rips wandering gases around in opposition to the square law. Fran From: Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 3:36 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP Fran-- "all the gas atoms in a local region are blissfully unaware of their dilation relative to each other." This sounds like the opposite of a quantum system--maybe an "anti quantum" system. I think that its more likely that the Dirac Sea includes more than just positrons and electrons in a one dimensional array. Scalar fields are much simpler than three dimensional one's. Furthermore, such a scalar may not be really scalar at very small dimensions, for example between 10^-18 cm and 10^-35 cm. Of course below 10^-35 cm there is no concern. That's the nature of the one dimensional field where all particles can blissfully ignore each other from 0 to 10^-35 cm. We should call that scalar field, Plank's virtual string field. Plank and Dirac, I guess, knew each other, kinda like you and Jones do. Bob - Original Message - From: Roarty, Francis X<mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 12:14 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP Jones, I like your 2nd verse [snip] Photons from 3-space could be lensed into one dimension, where they are upshifted and reflected back into 3-space with added energy - even when the Dirac sea itself is not disrupted. That would be an alternative explanation for excess non-nuclear energy to appear in those reactions where little gamma radiation is seen. [/snip] and agree with the sentiment of the first [snip] The irony of that happenstance - for LENR is that the near-field electrostatic repulsive forces between two DDL atoms could make the possibility of nuclear fusion vastly less probable, while at the same time acting as a ultra-strong magnifying lens for photons.[/snip] but not the method suggested.. Would not Naudt's relativistic hydrogen provide the same? That is the local atoms would be unaware of their transformation and their attraction and or repulsion would be unchanged and based on only local differences in velocity like 2 aircraft caught in the same wind pattern the relative velocity to the stationary Ni would be changed to the point of dilation enabling the DDL but since it is the space time that the gas atoms occupy which is being modified by the Ni geometry all the gas atoms in a local region are blissfully unaware of their dilation relative to each other. Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 12:21 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Lensing in spinplasmonics and SPP Here is a current story on the magic of gravitat
