Robin said [snip] This is perhaps because it's the electron the shrinks, while the assumption is made that the proton is constant. This would result in a p value for the maximum energy release in my model of 119 and a matching energy of 102 keV. [/snip]
Robin... and what value if both electron and proton shrink like near C hydrogen ejected from the corona or Naudts theory of relativistic hydrogen? Fran -----Original Message----- From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2015 2:39 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Fractional Hydrogen without Mills In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 3 Jul 2015 16:52:31 -0700: Hi Jones, [snip] >Robin, for the record, can we list the smallest theoretical state of >hydrogen redundancy for your model, Mills' model, DDL, and Arbab's model . >in terms of mass-energy. > >We can start with the most literal case, where there are 136 Hydrino energy >levels below 1/1 (1/2 - 1/137), and the ionization energy required is a >whole integer multiple of 27.2 eV, where the integer is 2...137. In this >case, 27.2 eV x 137 = 3726.4 eV. > I don't think this is quite what you think it is. This is almost how the size of the energy hole is calculated that triggers shrinkage from the ground state, except that the value of the integer is off by one. I.e. to go from the ground state to 137 in one step would require an energy hole of 27.2 x (137 - 1) = 3698.7 eV. However the total energy released in going to that state from the ground state is (137^2 * 13.6) - 13.6 = 255207.264 eV (almost half an electron mass BTW). The ionization energy from this state would be the same except that the 13.6 is not subtracted because the end state is complete ionization not the ground state from which we started to shrink. IOW the ionization energy would be 255220.862 eV. For IRH, I'm not sure what it is, and I don't think even the proponents know exactly, though I could be wrong about that. If one makes the assumption that the proton circles around a stationary electron, and uses the same formula that one would use to calculate the Bohr orbit, but with proton mass substituted for electron mass, then one gets a value of about 25000 eV. For Arbab's model one gets a value of 255000eV i.e. half an electron mass equivalent when n=alpha. (Neutron star). This is essentially the same value Mills gets for a TSO (Transition State Orbitsphere). The difference is in the radius, i.e. for Mills' TSO the radius is the fine structure constant (alpha) x ground state radius, whereas for Arbab, the radius is equal to the classical electron radius, i.e. alpha _squared_ times ground state radius, thus alpha times Mills TSO. This is a direct consequence of Mills assuming that trapped photons create pseudo charge increasing the electric field of the nucleus. BTW, I want to thank you for posing the question, because it made me examine my own model more closely. I noticed that only when the weighting factor is 1 (i.e. all the mass loss comes from the electron), does it result in a radius equal to the classical electron radius when n=alpha (same as Arbab). I think 1 is probably the correct value for the weighting factor that I was always uncertain about. This is perhaps because it's the electron the shrinks, while the assumption is made that the proton is constant. This would result in a p value for the maximum energy release in my model of 119 and a matching energy of 102 keV. Don't know much about DDL, however Google supplied http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2F1304.0833&ei=VHeXVba1CMLGmAX4lLyQCQ&usg=AFQjCNGeR5fkfAu6tTJInn03b1pOsvgRiw&bvm=bv.96952980,d.dGY&cad=rja a.o. which is interesting and also refers to: J. Maly and J. Va'vra, Electron Transitions on Deep Dirac Levels II, Fusion Technology, Vol. 27, January 1995. >1) 27.2 eV x 137 = 3726.4 eV. >2) DDL observed (as dark matter) 3.56 keV >3) >4) >Etc. > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
