In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 01:41:18 -0400: Hi, [snip] >On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 12:46 AM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: >> I suspect that most of the people believe in COE which excludes any free >> energy from ZPF. Maybe one day someone will come up with proof that ZPF can >> be practically utilized, but until that time I will abide by COE. > >I have yet to see any refutation of: > >http://www.earthtech.org/publications/PRDv35_3266.pdf > >Granted, Puthoff's paper is based on the Bohr model, however, that >only simplifies the complexity of the math. My conjecture minimizes >entities by stating that the hydrogen atom in a NAE experiences >distortion of the orbital field which causes additional drawing of >energy from the ZPF. Upon exiting the NAE influence, the electron >then radiates the energy upon restoration of the electron orbit to an >undistorted state. It's not totally unlike Randell's theory of >fractional states. > >Silly but extremely simple.
Actually it reminds me more of Fran's theory than Mills. However the H wouldn't get used up at all. That might be something to keep an eye on. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
