Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: MaxPowers75
Pauli predicted the neutrino twenty years or so before it was experimentally confirmed.

Contradicts your contention.

Has anyone solved the Schrodinger equation for the hydrino? Or calculated energy-dependent reaction cross sections for creation of hydrinos of various states upon collision of hydrogen with other species?

Or for the conversion of a hydrino back to regular atomic hydrogen?

Can one excite a hydrino electron with lasers?

As for the tunneling -- is there a theoretical basis for rate of tunneling -- how does it compare to that of protons?

If it is a stable state (energetically favored) then one ought to see significant quantities of them if one knows where / how to look (what is the activation barrier to creation of a hydrino anyway?)

Cheers!

72 posted on 06/05/2012 11:03:19 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: grey_whiskers

“Pauli predicted the neutrino twenty years or so before it was experimentally confirmed.
Contradicts your contention.”

Not really a prediction, it was more of an ad-hoc attempt to explain beta decay while retaining conservation of energy. Neutrons are a better example but as I stated above it would have been ignored, as would neutrinos, if there was not some compelling theory or hypothesis that indicated they should be looked for.

“Has anyone solved the Schrodinger equation for the hydrino? Or calculated energy-dependent reaction cross sections for creation of hydrinos of various states upon collision of hydrogen with other species?”

Yes to both, Dr.Mills has an entire book with just such details: http://www.blacklightpower.com/theory-2/book/. He postulated a boundary condition and it led to what he calls an “orbitsphere” derived from Maxwell’s equations and based on a paper by Hermann Haus, which it is claimed Haus actually handed to Dr.Mills when he did a year of graduate work in electrical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that shows there is a classical non-radiation condition when a distribution of accelerating charges will not emit electromagnetic radiation. Essentially a solution to the problem Bohr and many others were faced with at the start of modern QM.
The general idea of hydrinos is that only resonant non-radiative energy transfers to catalysts will cause hydrogen to release energy and become a hydrino. Under certain conditions hydrogen is self catalyzing, though, its affinity for becoming a molecule would limit that outcome in most environments. The entire idea is not unheard of and is very similar to “Förster resonance energy transfer”.
According to Dr.Mills: “Since the potential energy of atomic hydrogen is 27.2 eV, two H atoms formed from H2 by collision with a third, hot H can act as a catalyst for this third H by accepting 2·27.2 eV from it. By the same mechanism, the collision of two hot H2 provide 3H to serve as a catalyst of 3·27.2 eV for the fourth. Following the energy transfer to the catalyst an intermediate is formed having the radius of the H atom and a central field of 3 and 4 times the central field of a proton, respectively, due to the contribution of the photon of each intermediate. The radius is predicted to decrease as the electron undergoes radial acceleration to a stable state having a radius that is 1/3 (m = 2) or 1/4 (m = 3) the radius of the uncatalyzed hydrogen atom with the further release of 54.4 eV and 122.4 eV of energy, respectively. This energy emitted as a characteristic EUV continuum with a cutoff at 22.8 nm and 10.1 nm, respectively, was observed from pulsed hydrogen discharges. The continua spectra directly and indirectly match significant celestial observations.”
There are no current conventional explanations for the observed “EUV continuum with a cutoff at 22.8 nm and 10.1 nm”. Two papers, among many others, proposing the extremely controversial hydrino hypothesis have been peer reviewed and published by the European Journal of Physics.

“Or for the conversion of a hydrino back to regular atomic hydrogen?”

If it is possible to directly reverse the catalyst process that causes hydrinos. I would imagine that converting hydrinos directly back to hydrogen through a reverse non resonant energy transfer using a catalyst would be extremely hard and would most likely impossible.

According to Dr.Mills regarding hydrinos as “dark matter”:

“gamma rays impinging on dark matter will result in pair production. The characteristic signature of the identity of dark matter as hydrino being the emission of the 511 kev annihilation energy of pair production is observed.”

Also see below.

“Can one excite a hydrino electron with lasers?”

My understanding is no. They are extremely nonreactive and cannot absorb or emit light. According to Dr.Mills:

“Resonant photon induced excited state hydrino transitions are forbidden. Considering that hydrinos are the identity of dark matter that is why the latter is dark. It does not absorb or emit light from electronic transitions. But, hydrogen can be formed from hydrino by a high-energy collision that ionizes the hydrino atom to a
proton and an electron that recombine back into atomic hydrogen.”

“As for the tunneling — is there a theoretical basis for rate of tunneling — how does it compare to that of protons?
(what is the activation barrier to creation of a hydrino anyway?)s”

According to Dr.Mills there are 137 hydrino H 1/n states between hydrogen and a neutron. H 1/2 would have half the diameter of a hydrogen atom.
H(1/2), MW = 1 g/mole, should effuse
about twice as fast as He, MW = 4 g/mole, because effusion rates (and the velocities of the respective particles) depend on the square root of the MWs (at
a given temperature).
As n in H 1/n gets higher the “tunneling” rates should speed up proportionally until they are very similar to neutrons.

Dr.Mills book can be downloaded free here: http://www.blacklightpower.com/theory-2/book/

and on that site are many clarifications of his theory. It is also steadily updated to counteract criticisms and to reflect new understandings. That would give you a better understanding then I can.

“If it is a stable state (energetically favored) then one ought to see significant quantities of them if one knows where / how to look”

Mills had samples of simple chemical compounds available for chemical characterization by interested labs which repeatedly showed a previously unseen and unexplained upfield hydrogen shift in the NMR spectra.
This can surely be handwaved away as an inexplicable or meaningless anomaly if one rejects Dr.Mills theory though.

As a clarification I am not saying this is %100 true or that hydrinos definitely exist as stated in Dr.Mills theory but the entire affair is way out of the league of the average, or even extremely adept, scammer and it is, therefore, worth approaching with an open mind while retaining a healthy skepticism, the same skepticism that should be directed at all theories. I have seen numerous people that have validated that the Millsian molecular program can accurately calculate binding energies for complex molecules using simple closed form equations and nothing more than a few simple physical constants. That alone puts him heads and tails above anyone else that has claimed anything remotely similar.


74 posted on 06/06/2012 5:18:24 AM PDT by MaxPowers75
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson