Dammit Fran, ya made me leave the Dimebox Saloon to go look up the refs… Good news is that my memory isn’t fading yet!
2012: Quantum Ground States as Equilibrium Particle‐Vacuum Interaction States http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.1952.pdf And his first paper on this in ’87: http://www.earthtech.org/publications/PRDv35_3266.pdf Abstract A remarkable feature of atomic ground states is that they are observed to be radiationless in nature, despite (from a classical viewpoint) typically involving charged particles in accelerated motions. The simple hydrogen atom is a case in point. This universal ground‐state characteristic is shown to derive from particle‐vacuum interactions in which a dynamic equilibrium is established between radiation emission due to particle acceleration, and compensatory absorption from the zero ‐point fluctuations of the vacuum electromagnetic field [1]. The result is a net radiationless ground state. This principle constitutes an overarching constraint that delineates an important feature of quantum ground states. And this work by David Rodriguez which adds to the above: 2012: “Orbital stability and the quantum atomic spectrum from Stochastic Electrodynamics” http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.6168 Last part of Abstract: Puthoff's work led necessarily to the quantization of angular momentum: "if stable orbits exist... then their angular momentum must be quantized"; now, too, we are able to do a much stronger statement: "the equations of the system, in the presence of ZPF background, lead necessarily to a discrete set of stable orbits". Rodriguez’s paper is extensive… Fran’s buying the next round of drinks!! :-) -Mark Iverson _____________________________________________ From: Frank roarty [mailto:fr...@roarty.biz] Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2013 7:13 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:ICCF18 Kim Slides Mark, I think Puthoff fell short in suggesting ZPE keeps the electron and nucleus spatially separated.. Jan Naudts 2005 paper on relativistic hydrogen suggests f/h is relativistic based on Casimir suppression.. that tells me the larger virtual particles are still present in a cavity but appear contracted from our inertial frame. Rhueda and Haisch make the analogy for Lorentzian contraction of a spacecraft approaching C as a car driving thru a rainstorm.. the faster the cars forward speed the denser the rain becomes in a Pythagorean relationship with the downward speed of the rain. We know time dilation is undetectable except by relative measure and the virtual particles measured in a lab near C, a stationary lab floating in free space or a nano sized lab in a Casimir cavity would all see virtual particles of normal size and be unaware of any time dilation. It is this Pythagorean relationship that makes me posit a relativistic explanation for Casimir effect and that the nucleus and electron are temporally displaced, The electron is electrically tethered but is opposed from temporal displacement by a stream of virtual particles passing through our physical plane on the temporal axis… it is this orientation that is responsible for relativistic measure as it establishes our time metric individually for our inertial frame like the little zip toys that kids would pull the gear tape and then let fly…. We don’t know how fast the ether [gear tape] is spinning us up locally since it represents our clock it always seems like C from our local measure. I jumped on Jones post because I am always on the look out for a self assembling Maxwellian demon like process that will prove the HUP can be exploited. The concept of changing the Casimir force thru migration while an IRH/heavy electron is locked into a p orbital of Ni is intriguing.. a self assembled rectifying agent? Where random motion of gas is supposed to cancel out spatially this scenario doesn’t have to become directionalized as long as it moves between areas with different values of Casimir force it will stress the heavy electron because the f/h will be translating to different values but the electron is unable to leave the p orbital…. You need this asymmetry where the f/h value can oppose random motion and discount the thermal energy required for chemical reaction..in this case I think it may ionize the Ni, immediately reform to the appropriate fractional value for it’s local geometry and reform in the p shell as a heavy electron again in an endless reaction based on changes in Casimir force. This may even be close to the Mills animations… nice hypothesis by Jones! Fran _____________________________________________ From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2013 1:04 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:ICCF18 Kim Slides Jones/Fran, Wish I had time to read more; my vortex folder has 560 unread msgs! This may have been suggested before, but I’ll throw it out there into the collective to see if it strikes accord with anyone… In thinking (heretically, of course!) about f/H states, and how the mainstream thinks sub-ground-state states are figments of our imaginations, I may have an explanation. I think it was Puthoff who suggested that a continual interaction (xchng of E?) between the ZPF and electrons is what maintains them at some distance from the nucleus. Well, when atoms find themselves in a Casimir cavity, and some of the larger wavelength ZPF is EXCLUDED, then there is LESS ZPE (E not F) to maintain what we know as the ground state of electrons of those atoms. Thus, the electrons fall to a lower level which balances with whatever level of ZPE is present in the Casimir cavity… am I behind the 8-ball on this? Has this been proposed yet? -Mark Iverson _____________________________________________ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2013 7:23 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:ICCF18 Kim Slides _____________________________________________ From: Frank roarty …just staying with Ni and f/h would this hypothesis be consistent with the anomalous spectrum emitted? Would this f/h acting as a heavy electron give off photons when changing state..and again how would it change state if it is locked into the p orbital..could the fractional value change states while still acting as a heavy electron? Fran I see where you are going with this suggestion, which is provocative - but the answer is unknown. It looks like you are trying to move beyond the Mills’ theory into a zero point explanation. We have discussed before that there is a known connection between ZPE and phase-change, but most of the evidence for this is in other fields. http://www.isis.stfc.ac.uk/science/bioscience/changes-in-proton-zero-point-e nergy-responsible-for-dna-phase-change11125.html Actually there is a niche of science concerned with materials which are tailored to exhibit large phase changes. Below the authors demonstrate that phase change materials (PCMs) which are known to switch reproducibly between an amorphous and a crystalline phase, are very promising candidates to achieve a significant oscillation force without a change of composition. http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1006/1006.4065.pdf Of course we know that phase change can happen with large thermal consequences. In short, we have to ask: is nickel hydride a kind of inadvertent PCM, and does it’s thermal activity depend on a precise loading of hydrogen, and then cycling around the phase-change parameter; or indeed does this depend on a loading with an isomer of hydrogen instead of plain hydrogen (such as the reduced ground state) ? Since we know that in many NiH reactions there are no gammas, but there is a rather distinct connection between the thermal anomaly and nickel phase-change, then a ZPE hypothesis would be strengthened by showing how higher energy photons can be emitted continuously and anomalously - especially in the IR range of 10-20 microns. Since we know that nickel alone will not do this other than in a Mills scenario - we have to ask if an inclusion of below ground state hydrogen will act as the “antenna for ZPE”, so to speak. This seems to me to be a satisfactory way to move away from a nuclear basis for LENR to a zero point basis. A magnetic anomaly seems to fit into a ZPE explanation better than it fits into a nuclear explanation. What is needed is falsifiability.
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
