Assuming that whatever the reaction is that produces a lot of energy from
potential energy, that energy must be distributed as heat without destroying
the structure allowing the coupling—potential energy to heat. In this regard I
would consider that there is a condensate or other coherent system which allows
includes this coupling. The magnetic field that Higgins suggests may be such a
coupling mechanism, allowing the electronic structure of the snowflakes to
accept the potential energy changes—maybe nuclear mass reductions—without the
damaging, high—kinetic---energy individual particles and the radiation
associated with these particles.
For what its worth, any idea that is not correct is “total crap” which there
must be a good deal of given the variety of ideas.
Bob Cook
From: Bob Higgins
Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2016 3:23 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:North Korea... and the UDD "candle"?
I think the argument being offered is that because the Rydberg matter has such
large diameter electron orbitals, there is a high magnetic moment for these
materials. When one ~2D hexagonal Rydberg "snowflake" is put atop another, the
magnetic moments align like two disk magnets oriented N-S-N-S.
Since in this case we are talking about H or D Rydberg snowflakes, I think the
electrons are all in large planar Rydberg orbitals and this hexagonal Rydberg
snowflake would behave as a BEC. Because of that, if one of the electrons were
forced to take a different orbital, it may completely disrupt the cluster. So
I have been thinking about ways that the small separation could occur that
could work across an entire snowflake all at once.
I have mentally postulated that as more and more "snowflakes" align and stack,
perhaps the magnetic moment forces along the axis of the aligned atoms squeeze
the layers together, just as 3 magnet disks stacked will produce a greater
axial field than 2 magnet disks. In the case of disk magnets, as the number in
the stack increases, at some point the axial field will not continue to
increase - because of the high permeability of the magnetic material, the field
will leak out the sides. It could be that these highly anisotropic Rydberg
snowflakes may not suffer that effect and the axial magnetic field may continue
to increase for a large number of stacked layers.
Also, in that same vein... if one of the electrons in a Rydberg cluster
(presume BEC) were excited out of the Rydberg state (ionized) perhaps by a
photon interaction, the whole snowflake could self-destruct. If it were an
inner layer for a large stack of snowflakes that self-destructed, you could
have the effect of the magnetic field of many stacked snowflakes acting on the
particles - sort of a magnetic explosion. In that case, it may be possible
that a particle could receive magnetic accelerations from many layers at once -
a large number of atoms in the stack acting upon the few particles of the
disintegrating inner layer that was ionized by the photon. In that case, the
energy supplied may not represent Coulombic explosion, but instead an Oersted
explosion with many particles acting on a few. Then the whole business of the
2.3 pm spacing, based solely on Coulombic explosion calculations, is pure
poppycock.
However, I do not understand Winterberg's postulate entirely and this magnetic
theory of mine could be total crap.
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:54 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote:
In reply to Bob Higgins's message of Sun, 10 Jan 2016 10:51:47 -0700:
Hi,
This message will only make sense if viewed with a fixed width font.
[snip]
>What Holmlid proposes is that planar hexagonal Rydberg clusters of deuterium
can form stacks where the inter-nucleus spacing in the stack can be 2.3 pm.
The hexagonal Rydberg clusters are essentially planar with an inter-nucleus
spacing that is bigger than D2 gas. So, in one dimension, along the column of
the stack, Holmlid claims that the inter-nucleus spacing is 2.3 pm, while in
the other 2 dimensions the inter-nucleus spacing is 100x bigger. From a
density standpoint, this would be a set of linear strings. How do you ascribe
density to something that is a linear string? It would certainly be a tensor.
[snip]
I was going to write:-
What makes me highly skeptical of the claim is that I see no way to get two
deuterons (or protons for that matter), within 2.3 pm of one another while the
electrons are hundreds of pm away.
...when it occurred to me that the columns might interleave, such that the
electrons from one layer came between the nuclei from the layers above and
below. The spacing between layers would then be half of 2.3 pm.
Imagine pushing two parallel "cylinders" into one another until the wall of
each
reached the axis of the other, with the layers of each "cylinder" interleaving
with those of the other.)
A1 A2
E N E
E N E
E N E
E N E
E N E
E N E
Each E N E layer is actually a single atom where the two E's represent a
single
electron in a circular orbit. N stands for nucleus. A1 is the axis of the
first
vertical cylinder. A2 is the axis of the second vertical cylinder.
I wonder if coincidentally(?) the vertical separation distance is the fine
structure constant times the radius??
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
