The appropriate term is Inverse Rydberg states but “fractional Rydberg”states is the term Mills and Lu used to describe the hydrino in their paper http://www.blacklightpower.com/papers/Time-resolved%20paper.pdf from the introduction [snip] The product is H(1/P), fractional Rydberg states of atomic hydrogen called “hydrino atoms”,[/snip] It is unwise to discount chemistry as the bootstrap stage powering the nuclear reaction. From day 1 with the atomic welder it was clear something odd happens when hydrogen is disassociated by an arc between tungsten catalysts and then re-associates to weld [melt] metals all the way up to tungsten. Just because there is transmutation doesn’t mean that is the sole source of energy or that it is even the initial source of heat. There is not enough lead shielding for fusion to be occurring at a level that would explain the output of an e-cat. Other more exotic nuclear paths would be necessary to accomplish the task with the sort of shielding Rossi used and I am saying we already know there is something special about atomic hydrogen from it’s welding abilities.. heating it in a catalyst is a way to lower the energy needed to disassociate it into atomic form
From: Danny Ross Lunsford [mailto:antimatte...@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 1:47 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg Fractional Rydberg? That's nonsense too - this isn't chemistry, it's not electrons. It's nucleons. The key point is that nickel 62 is at the peak of the binding-energy-per-nucleon curve. Somehow I think a circular reaction is going on around the peak - call it "fussion". ---------------------------------------------- "I write a little. I erase a lot." - Chopin --- On Tue, 11/1/11, Roarty, Francis X <francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> wrote: From: Roarty, Francis X <francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Date: Tuesday, November 1, 2011, 12:40 PM That is exactly what I was saying… Now that Mills admits the “hydrino” is actually fractiona Rydberg hydrogen the term hydrino not only becomes redundant but also carries all the baggage of his previously wrong definition that caused so much controversy. The term should be eradicated with extreme predjudice. From: Danny Ross Lunsford [mailto:antimatte...@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 1:28 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg You can forget the hydrino. It does no good to adhere to bad ideas. Angular momentum conservation prevents it. We need to use good physics to get to the bottom of this phenomenon, and ruthlessly eliminate the bad ideas. ---------------------------------------------- "I write a little. I erase a lot." - Chopin --- On Tue, 11/1/11, Roarty, Francis X <francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> wrote: A recent paper “Time-resolved hydrino continuum transitions with cutoffs at 22.8 nm and 10.1 nm” http://www.springerlink.com/content/q8005267210x3568/fulltext.pdf...<http://www.springerlink.com/content/q8005267210x3568/fulltext.pdf>
