OK,
Horace,
I know I need some help which is why, as Jones pointed out I
brought it here. It sounds like you now follow my "miracle" path- Right or
wrong you caused me to at least organize all the dots I am trying to connect
into a format that can be followed. You rightly point out the need for
explaining several miracles which I probably can not do without some big
name help but if I organize the path well enough I may be able to entice
Prevenslik, Bourgoin or Naudts to take a closer look at it from the
perspective of their present contributions.
[snip]
Unless I missed something, neither the article by Naudts nor by
Bougoin has made any statements with regards to cavities. They are
discussing the possibility of stable sub-ground state hydrogen based
on relativistically consistent orbitals.
[Reply]
You are correct; I missed a step, I associated the hydrino with the cavity
based on Mills' claims of producing the hydrino inside Rayney Nickel
catalyst which meet Casimir geometry. Although BLP is claimed to have exotic
hydrides formed from hydrinos
In their labs, AFAIK no one has ever produced a hydrino outside of a cavity.
My premise is that the hydrino is relativistic hydrogen and therefore can
only be perceived from another time frame such as a deep gravity well or as
I propose to coin a term, inside a Casimir "gravity hill". Mills was able to
"deliver" hydrinos to Rowan Univercity only as hydrogen in situ within the
pores of Rayney nickel and the translation would only occur to atoms after
disassociation.
[snip]
the computation does not involve motion of the atom with regards to the
observer. It has only to do with the change in mass of the electron, m =
gamma*m0, due to relativistic (high energy) circular motion of orbitals.
Saying "that hydrino can exist in a cavity only has a relativistic
solution." Is like saying "that lead (Pb) can exist in a cavity only has a
relativistic solution." The cavity is irrelevant to the cited
references.
[Reply]
Pb is not a fractional state element like the hydrino but ok your point is I
haven't proved that a Casimir cavity changes the relativistic solution for
ground state of anything. Below I appended the premise to include Mills
part in the story and remove any assignment of "cavity" property to Naudts
or Bourgoin.
Casimir cavities stretch space-time into a "gravity Hill" as opposed to a
" gravity Well" based on the following.
1. Mills' claim hydrino formed inside skeletal catalyst Rayney nickel has
up to 137 fractional quantum states.
2. Naudts <http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0507193v2> and Bourgoin
<http://www.m-hikari.com/astp/astp2007/astp5-8-2007/bourgoinASTP5-8-2007.pdf
> math that these fractional states can exist as a relativistic solution
3. I propose the orbital can collapse spatially below Bohr radius because
the "displacement" to the nucleus has been partially converted to temporal
units. The fractional quantum radius only exists from our 3D perspective
outside the cavity observing the hydrino inside.
4. Prevenslik <http://www.geocities.com/sonoluminescence2004/casimir.PDF>
work replicating Casimir effect through "up-conversion" indicates nature has
method to convert IR >> VUV via conservation of energy. I posit this method
is relativistic based on 2 -3 above and therefore all frequencies (entire
spectrum including virtual photons) only "appear" up-converted from our
perspective.
5. Christian Beck papers, Measureability of vacuum
<http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0605418> fluctuations and dark energy and
[3] Electromagnetic <http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0703364> dark energy
relating virtual photons below 1.7Thz more gravitationally active than those
above. I posit the ratio of virtual particles above and below 1.7Thz CHANGES
approaching event horizon to reflect Beck's theory the larger virtual
photons are more gravitationally active.
6. I postulate therefore the "up-conversion" in a Casimir cavity is
relativistic, perceived outside the cavity as full spectrum, but the change
in ratio of virtual photon frequencies is in the opposite direction creating
a gravity "Hill" or lack of gravitationally active virtual photons as
opposed to a gravity "Well".
Best Regards
Fran
