Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 11:33 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory Francis, After doing some more reading I realize that since the orbit of the electron is a probability distribution according to QM it doesn't matter h

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

f the lattice that is > actually causing the suppression? > > Fran > > > > *From:* H Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, January 27, 2014 2:16 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory > > > > A hydr

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

t; but it is negative which begs the question where does mass grow larger.. >>>> since the negatively accelerated atom is equivalent to the stationary >>>> observer and we outside the cavity are equivalent to the relativistic twin >>>> maybe the mass is added to the quantum ge

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

s >>> but it is negative which begs the question where does mass grow larger.. >>> since the negatively accelerated atom is equivalent to the stationary >>> observer and we outside the cavity are equivalent to the relativistic twin >>> maybe the mass is a

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

in at least one major way. Mills >> predicts the atom size as being proportional to the integer directly while >> quantum physics suggests that it varies as the square. This is a huge >> difference and I can not imagine why the correct rule has not been clearly >> establi

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

*From:* H Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, January 27, 2014 2:16 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory > > > > A hydrogen atom H is an atom because the motion of the electron is bound > to the proton. If the

RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

twin maybe the mass is added to the quantum geometry of the lattice that is actually causing the suppression? Fran From: H Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 2:16 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory A hydrogen atom H is an ato

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

urement for an excited hydrogen diameter that > supports one of these theories? > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message- > From: H Veeder > To: vortex-l > Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 5:40 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory > > > While people debate how sma

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

Here's what my intuition tells me about the 1/137 level. An index label (the principal quantum number) has been confused for a physical constant. It has the aspect of a rookie error. It's understandable on one level, because there's a lot going on before you get there. One can almost piece toge

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

nto that >>> category. Reminds me of the announcement by CERN of the neutrino speed >>> exceeding that of light which was retracted once a hardware problem was >>> resolved. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> >>> -Original Messa

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

claim. Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Driscoll To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 7:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory I assume it is either impossible or almost impossible to measure the size of an excited hydrogen atom (i.e. n = 2, 3, 4 ...) - otherwise

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

. Does anyone > know of an accurate measurement for an excited hydrogen diameter that > supports one of these theories? > > Dave > > > > -Original Message- > From: H Veeder > To: vortex-l > Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 5:40 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's t

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

theories? Dave -Original Message- From: H Veeder To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 5:40 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory While people debate how small a hydrogen atom can be, there seems to be no debate about how big a hydrogen atom can be. Harry On Sun

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

ing that of light which was retracted once a hardware problem was >> resolved. >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> -----Original Message- >> From: Jeff Driscoll >> To: vortex-l >> Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 5:16 pm >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills'

RE: [Vo]:Mills's theory

16 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory I did some reading and using the concept of mass increases as the velocity approaches the speed of light is not a good way to look at it (for reasons that are not totally clear to me). There is time dilation and length contract

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

t; But, we must abide by natural laws and most times they do not care what we > prefer. :( > > Dave > > > > -Original Message- > From: Eric Walker > To: vortex-l > Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 4:12 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory > > On Sun, Jan 26

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

d blend nicely with the >> other integer portion that we all assume is real. If the total series is >> found to be valid, then there is no special consideration needed for the >> 1/137 term. >> >> But, we must abide by natural laws and most times they do not care what

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

resolved. Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Driscoll To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 5:16 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory http://io9.com/5642233/ask-a-physicist-is-the-fine-structure-constant-really-constant excerpt: About a decade ago, the UNSW team found, mu

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

f the continuation toward 1/infinity. It would be beautiful if his orbitspheres continued in that manner and no special fractional state at 1/137 is anticipated. Dave -Original Message- From: James Bowery To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 5:15 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's th

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

the > 1/137 term. > > But, we must abide by natural laws and most times they do not care what we > prefer. :( > > Dave > > > > -Original Message- > From: Eric Walker > To: vortex-l > Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 4:12 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

they do not care what we > prefer. :( > > Dave > > > > -Original Message- > From: Eric Walker > To: vortex-l > Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 4:12 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory > > On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:55 PM, James Bowery wrote: > >

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

valid, then there is no special consideration needed for the 1/137 term. But, we must abide by natural laws and most times they do not care what we prefer. :( Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Jan 26, 2014 4:12 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills&#

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

Because it is not fixed, the change in the magnetic constant affects the value of the electromagnetic nature of the vacuum. This changes 1/137. The mechanism behind the Papp reaction is based on the change of the electromagnetic nature of the vacuum caused by massive charge screening in a coulomb

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

It is likely that the exact value of the fine structure constant is not significant as it appears to change based on energy (1/128 at 80 GEV) and seems to vary over time. So 137 might be a decent integer approximation of a value that changes under varying circumstances. On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:55 PM, James Bowery wrote: The theory is a photon like zitterbewegung model describing states that > retain locality in phase space with circular cycles of a trapped photon > representing the usual eigenstates. The Maxwell quanta hbar(c) becomes a > classical angular m

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Eric Walker wrote: > >1. Rational number, and precisely specifiable). >2. The fine structure constant, α = e^2/hbar*c ~ 1/137.035999074. > This is no doubt an irrational number, despite the numerator and >denominator, because of the irrational comp

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 10:47 AM, David Roberson wrote: If he eventually does include these two well supported phenomena, then the > 1/137.0359 fraction most likely will be changed to a new one. Then, my > hope for inclusion of all the integer and fractional values might reappear > as a conseque

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 1:47 PM, David Roberson wrote: > Jeff Driscoll says: > > |smaller fractions than 1/137.0359 are not possible because electron > would be going faster than light > | > > Special Relativity explains the electron speed of light limit in a > somewhat reasonable manner. In tha

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

Jeff Driscoll says: |smaller fractions than 1/137.0359 are not possible because electron would be going faster than light| Special Relativity explains the electron speed of light limit in a somewhat reasonable manner. In that case the maximum speed is approached as the limit to a continuousl

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

well. >> >> I am not convinced that Mills' theory is correct in any way, but am >> speculating about some interesting characteristics that may be possible if >> it has validity. Mark this post as blue sky wild speculation. >> > yep, wild :) > >>

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

Mark this post as blue sky wild speculation. > yep, wild :) > > Dave > > > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Driscoll > To: vortex-l > Sent: Tue, Jan 21, 2014 10:15 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory > > I did some reading and using the concept

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

ing about some interesting characteristics that may be possible if it has validity. Mark this post as blue sky wild speculation. Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Driscoll To: vortex-l Sent: Tue, Jan 21, 2014 10:15 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory I did some r

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

gnificance > that we seek, so now I plan to go onto your site and look at the equations > in more detail. > > Dave > > > > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Driscoll > To: vortex-l > Sent: Tue, Jan 21, 2014 3:08 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory >

RE: [Vo]:Mills's theory

and equivalent negative velocities thru the metal tapestry. Fran From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 4:38 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory Thanks for the information Jeff. I was expecting his mass calculati

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

. That might be the significance that we seek, so now I plan to go onto your site and look at the equations in more detail. Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Driscoll To: vortex-l Sent: Tue, Jan 21, 2014 3:08 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory yes, it is all in there,

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

t; There are interesting implications if he does not need to. > > Dave > > > > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Driscoll > To: vortex-l > Sent: Tue, Jan 21, 2014 2:17 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory > > you have 3 significant digits for 1/13

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

-Original Message- From: Jeff Driscoll To: vortex-l 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 do

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

I think you miss the potential significance of the correlation I'm bringing up: If the mathematics of the normed division algebras can be brought to bear on Mills's theory and their correspondence to the four levels of coupling constants derived from the combinatorial hierarchy shown, it will prov

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,

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

>From "Quaternion Physics ": "In examining the Hydrogen atoms Quantum speed, ½(e/q)² = 1/137.12 appears and is approximagely equal to α." Quaternions are the third normed division algebra. On T

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

It does not make sense to me either. If dark matter exists in a halo around the Earth's equator and happens to be creating our low pressure atmospheric disturbances like I think it is, it is ionizing the crap out of our atmosphere as it decays. On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Axil Axil wrote:

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

How can a same concept (hydrino) be a seen as dark matter that does not react with normal matter except gravitationally and a cause of nuclear reactions that are required to produce 10^20 reactions per second? This does not make sense to me. On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Jeff Driscoll wrote:

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

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 p

Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory

special relativity considerations? I suspect that the number would be modified to something like 1/135 for example. Any comment? Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Driscoll To: vortex-l Sent: Mon, Jan 20, 2014 11:00 pm Subject: [Vo]:Mills's theory I tried to summarize

[Vo]:Mills's theory

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