Such a model is only good for fooling dumb investors.
Its good for 1o-20 million or so.... and a few decades ..
but the ITER model is far superior in that respect.
BLP update
-
-
How strong are those H2(1/4)* compound strands though, the white silk hair stuff. I do not understand why that isn't talked about.
-
How strong are those H2(1/4)* compound strands though, the white silk hair stuff. I do not understand why that isn't talked about.
I thought since it defeated the dark matter hypothesis, it was dropped as a subject.
-
I thought since it defeated the dark matter hypothesis, it was dropped as a subject.
Firstly that shouldn't stop people from pushing for information, it would be useful. This doesn't defeat the dark matter hypothesis. Strands including elements O and N woven in like a polymer would behave different from free H(1/4)*, intriguing still though not fully understood😊. All that has been implied is high chemical resistance and paramagnetism.
-
Firstly that shouldn't stop people from pushing for information, it would be useful. This doesn't defeat the dark matter hypothesis. Strands including elements O and N woven in like a polymer would behave different from free H(1/4)*, intriguing still though not fully understood😊. All that has been implied is high chemical resistance and paramagnetism.
Yes, but it interacts magnetically and chemically, which is classically un-dark matter-like
-
Yes, but it interacts magnetically and chemically, which is classically un-dark matter-like
Point taken. Molecular density in deep space? other things?
-
This idea that hydrinos constitute dark matter is bunk. True dark matter is pure gravitational mass. No charge at all. So it doesn't react with anything. Hydrinos will be knocked back to regular hydrogen by some energies of gamma rays.
-
This idea that hydrinos constitute dark matter is bunk. True dark matter is pure gravitational mass. No charge at all. So it doesn't react with anything. Hydrinos will be knocked back to regular hydrogen by some energies of gamma rays.
Assertion sans cite, or supporting rationale ... at least Mills has something to back up his theory, his assertions.
Let me ask you, what is the most abundant element in the universe/galaxy/all of known creation? Have you heard of Occam's razor?
First three most common elements in the Milky Way Galaxy estimated spectroscopically:
Per wiki: The abundance of the lightest elements is well predicted by the standard cosmological model, since they were mostly produced shortly (i.e., within a few hundred seconds) after the Big Bang, in a process known as Big Bang nucleosynthesis. Heavier elements were mostly produced much later, inside of stars.
-
Assertion sans cite, or supporting rationale
Fact is: Out in the cosmos there is more H*-H* that plain H2.
-
Fact is: Out in the cosmos there is more H*-H* that plain H2.
than?
-
This idea that hydrinos constitute dark matter is bunk. True dark matter is pure gravitational mass. No charge at all. So it doesn't react with anything. Hydrinos will be knocked back to regular hydrogen by some energies of gamma rays.
What Mills calls a hydrino is an activated state and it should decay back to the ground state. E = n2(13.6 eV). The energy is based on Pharsis William phat photon states. Each n has a greater energy. At n=240 the energy is sufficient to turn a dense hydrogen atom to a neutron.
A galaxy acts like a centrifuge transferring momentum outward. A natural gradient of mass, not size of an atom. Dark matter is something lighter than neutrons but still uncharged.
-
Dark matter is something lighter than neutrons but still uncharged.
Dark matter simply does not exist. Pretty unskilled physicists claim that the rotation of some galaxy does not agree with the gravity law and mass seen.
But this is nonsense as any rotating structure in the universe is only stable after a very large number of synchronized rotations.
Unluckily the galaxys under discussion did not even complete (the out rim) a single rotation so far or only a few...A synchronized state thus is out of discussion.
So things like discussions about the MOND radius can be solved by better physics as synchronization is defined by magnetic = mass resonance.
-
What Mills calls a hydrino is an activated state and it should decay back to the ground state. E = n2(13.6 eV). The energy is based on Pharsis William phat photon states. Each n has a greater energy. At n=240 the energy is sufficient to turn a dense hydrogen atom to a neutron.
And none of that is according to Mills' theory. Just making that clear. Maybe you are unfamiliar with force-energy balance between electron and proton in Hydrogen atoms? Or any atoms? To wit (quick layman's summary): While (1) an excited state of hydrogen is formed by absorbing an external photon which superimposes and reduces the central field of the proton via its intrinsic electric field causing an increase in the radius of the electron orbitsphere, the (2) loss of energy from the "ground state" orbitsphere by a resonant transfer process results in a sort of different type of trapped photon. This trapped photon has an intrinsic electric field that superimposes and ADDS an integer value to the central field of the proton. A simpler way to think of the process is that the resonant transfer of energy to the catalyst subtracts a negative component of energy from the electron orbitsphere of the H atom resulting in an integer increase to the positive component of the central field.
Following the loss of this energy, the (3) formation of a trapped photon and the increase in the central positive field, hydrogen forms an intermediate state at the same radius followed by an increase in radial acceleration of the electron structure as it moves closer to the proton ... Force balance (4) is again reached when the collapsed hydrogen atom forms what Mills terms a hydrino state, which is both stable to radiation and cannot absorb or emit radiation OTHER than as it moves between hydrino states. Mills proposes that such hydrino states are the identity of dark matter
-
And none of that is according to Mills' theory. Just making that clear. Maybe you are unfamiliar with force-energy balance between electron and proton in Hydrogen atoms? Or any atoms? To wit (quick layman's summary): .... Force balance (4) is again reached when the collapsed hydrogen atom forms what Mills terms a hydrino state, which is both stable to radiation and cannot absorb or emit radiation OTHER than as it moves between hydrino states. Mills proposes that such hydrino states are the identity of dark matter
I am familiar with the theory. But I still think it is wrong. What causes an atom radius to be reduced is gravity. The same happens with electrons. An EVO has the same charge to mass ratio as an electron only it has many orders of magnitude more electrons. How would a force balance like that of Mills account for that? Quantized energy states that also cause gravity by special relativity does.
-
Maybe you are unfamiliar with force-energy balance between electron and proton in Hydrogen atoms? Or any atoms?
May be Mills did not yet find the physics that converts a photon into charge. His would bring him a Nobel....
So this is a quack model with 0=zero value except for marketing. Why should e.g. a 27eV photon generate the same field strength as an electron ???
Please show how this happens!!!
-
May be Mills did not yet find the physics that converts a photon into charge. His would bring him a Nobel....
Its coming ... the 'Nobel' that is. Do you know what 'pair production' is?
-
Do you know what 'pair production' is?
That reminds me of a girl I knew at school.
-
Its coming ...
Measuring H*-H* would deserve one. -- But first he had to distance from his crap idea.
As said. Without a proper derivation no force without proper action no force and every collectively acting mass has a Hamiltonian and finally a Lagrangian. And of course charge must be conserved not just disappear...
There is no electron flying around a proton. The proper model is a bit more complex. The correct method to calculate e-p potential is given by SO(4) physics based on magnetic resonance derived from the 3 basic forces. It gives all known digits not just a few like Mills.
There is a possible quantization for the electron potential (all electron g-factor square terms) and also for the proton magnetic moment given by the potential function that also has a square term. With this he could try to find a deeper orbit resonance. In fact the proton quantization closely matches the H*-H* energy...
-
Measuring H*-H* would deserve one. -- But first he had to distance from his crap idea.
As said. Without a proper derivation no force without proper action no force and every collectively acting mass has a Hamiltonian and finally a Lagrangian. And of course charge must be conserved not just disappear...
When will it come to you that there is no "electric charge" on the electron and on the proton? Maxwell was wrong - is that clear?
-
Maxwell was wrong -
and Benjamin Franklin as well
and Cherepanov was right
