have you looked at my website? I describe many details of Mills's theory: http://zhydrogen.com/
Jeff On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > After skimming Mill's book about how he treats the atom physics, I am > pretty amazed. > > Folks, his theory is really accurate, and we should not dismiss it just > because of the hydrino prediction. He actually calculates the g factor to > the same level as QED, but he indicates it took two decades of fiddling > with the QED equations to reach that level of accuracy. So the Math is as > right as what we can get by using ordinary QED/QM but Mill's math is much > more elegant. > > One hydrino state is predicted by QED too, but the spinnors are not > integrable in QED although > probably by combining them lead to an acceptable solution. Also the other > states may as well be there but it's probably hard to find them because of > the convoluted math. Also we should expect that these hydrino states have > as well non integrable spinors. The interesting thing to understand now is > what paths the QM/Mill's theory allow to go from a normal state to a > hydrino state. In a sense it is degenerate and it looks like these states > are locked. In a sense atoms must interact strongly e.g. get really close > together and act in a precise way in order to mediate > the forming of a hydrino. It is not unlikly that the conditions are very > special and rarely happens in normal physics/chemistry. > > In a sense it's crazy how people treat his work all over the intertubes. > They say that his results are wacko. It could be that the math is correct > but there is a some extra conditions for the solutions to be physical, that > is missing that relates to the integrability conditions for the spinors. > > Also if there any serious issues with his math I would like to know, else > he deserves respect, with or without the hydrino. > > /Stefan > -- Jeff Driscoll 617-290-1998
