Fran, are you thinking that this is a form of zero point energy? Dave
-----Original Message----- From: Roarty, Francis X <francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Fri, Nov 6, 2015 7:21 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium I think confusion will continue to reign for as long as researchers continue to attribute the energy levels solely to the atom instead of in combination with the dynamic Casimir environment through which it is randomly moving. IMHO molecular bonds formed in these regions have a non spatial component proportional to the inverse of confined spacing ^3 and become spring loaded when the molecule moves to a different confinement level which discounts their disassociation threshold. Fran From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 11:44 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium It’s very difficult to keep the terminology consistent. I think Holmlid would be wise to ditch the present designations and start over. From: Mark Jurich FYI: All, please take a close look at Fig. 2 of this Holmlid Paper: http://fuelrfuture.com/science/holm2.pdf I think it will help explain how Holmlid had viewed/grasped the energy levels back in early 2014. Also keep in mind that H(-1) is now called H(0). It was thought that the apparent Ultra-dense state was Inverted Rydberg Hydrogen (IRH, hence the “-1”), but now this state is seen as somewhat different. The “0” reflects that the orbital angular momentum of the electrons is zero. The picture in Fig 1 may need some modification to take into account the various apparent spin states of H(0). Winterberg’s earlier description has slightly fallen out of favor in regards to more recent data, but I am not sure what the latest findings suggest. Reading more of literature should help clear up the current understanding of H(0). Mark Jurich
