On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:46 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
Perhaps rapid transport of H through the material is necessary, to
increase the
likelihood that a proton will tunnel into a host atom, where it may
then
borrow an electron from the host to become a sub-quantum atom?
High
On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:46 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
Perhaps rapid transport of H through the material is necessary, to
increase the
likelihood that a proton will tunnel into a host atom, where it may
then
borrow an electron from the host to become a sub-quantum atom?
It seems to me
I know Horace and Steven have been commenting on this topic critically but I
kind of got what Frank was on about the first time (in amongst the confusing
word salad). The event horizon stuff escapes me... Here is (I think) a
testable hypothesis that would offer support to this time dilation
Thanks for the extensive response -- it has taken me a while to go
through it, and I'm sure I didn't do it all justice!
Frank wrote:
Stephen,
Snip---
The hydrino radius
between the nucleus and orbital has a temporal rise and spatial run
[snip]
Let's stop right there. The
Stephen wrote:
Let's stop right there. The 'present', for any observer, has zero thickness
along that observer's
time axis.
What is zero thickness for a human could be a lifetime at the subatomic level...
It all depends on what scale you're talking about... And don't mix scales!
-Mark
Even if I am wrong and Focardi's results are not
as iffy as I suspect, we still need to see a
solid independent replication, because these
results are very different from other claims.
Compare them to the original Mills claims that
were published about the time Focardi et al. got to work:
Frank: Please keep in mind that the rotation in the Lorentz transform
is hyperbolic, not circular.
A circular rotation has the form
| cos(theta) sin(theta) |
| -sin(theta) cos(theta) |
and it maps circles centered on the origin into other circles centered
on the origin. It appears to
Yes, but no doubt Nick is a fan of Lost and understand the intricacies of
http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Physics
Serious, folks - Frank has a fascinating alternative to Mills, and it is a
bit unfair to expect from him a perfectly-formed and error-free theory at
this point in time - even in
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell
Even if I am wrong and Focardi's results are not
as iffy as I suspect, we still need to see a
solid independent replication, because these
results are very different from ... Mills --
electrolysis; gigantic Ni surface area;
very low power
Jones Beene wrote:
** Yes - this is the key point, and why it may be impossible to
replicate without knowing every minute detail about that rod.
Italian researchers tell me that Focardi et al. have not been open or
cooperative, but many details about the rod are known. People have
examined
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Jones Beene wrote:
However, getting a massive charged particle to transverse a Casimir gap
would be difficult
Akshully How about, forget the massive bit, just substitute
tritium oxide for deuterium oxide and load any-old-material with Casimir
sized
Steven,
Been briefly auditing when work allows but this is a quickie...
I believe time speeds up from our perspective accounting for the amount
of catalytic action that occurs (if relativistic then reactants are
unaware of the acceleration and actually put in all those extra hours
from
Strictly approaching this question from a layman's POV:
Is it conceivable to speculate that an unknown component, one that is
possibly bound to the effects of time dilation play an integral role
in determining the rate of decay in radioactive nucleus, specifically
when an atom decides to decay?
Maybe these help:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_decay
http://www.eas.asu.edu/~holbert/eee460/decay.html
Meow!
Terry
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 2:11 PM, OrionWorkssvj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Strictly approaching this question from a layman's POV:
Is it conceivable to speculate that
I agree a small amount of rapidly decaying material trapped in a Casimir
cavity should decay measurably faster if the theory has legs.
-Original Message-
From: OrionWorks [mailto:svj.orionwo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 3:11 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:Hydrinos, Lorentz
Ho-hum news:
http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/researcher-condemns-conformity-among-his-peers
- Jed
Jed - I'm waiting for the man bites dog story.
At 02:34 PM 7/24/2009, you wrote:
Ho-hum news:
http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/researcher-condemns-conformity-among-his-peers
- Jed
You mean a man biting dog story surely?
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Steven Krivit
stev...@newenergytimes.comwrote:
Jed - I'm waiting for the man bites dog story.
At 02:34 PM 7/24/2009, you wrote:
Ho-hum news:
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 24 Jul 2009 01:43:40 -0800:
Hi Horace,
[snip]
It seems to me that such a tunneling event would be far more likely
if the hydrogen nucleus tunneled into the host nucleus bringing along
it's own electron as extra baggage. I think the prospects of
The Kiplinger Letter, July 24, 2009 had the following to say on the
topic of ENERGY:
-
Ever heard of thorium power? You will. The first nuclear reactor
fueled by thorium will be built in about five years, with more to
come. Thorium has a lot of practical advantages over the more
20 matches
Mail list logo
