[AR] Re: Mills Fuel Experiment
- From: Bill Claybaugh <wclaybaugh2@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 14:03:32 -0600
Careful Ian; there are models that suggest dark matter is it's own antiparticle
and thus would reduce to pure energy on contact with another dark matter
particle. Such a transition would have a specific spectral line.
Bill
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 21, 2015, at 11:55 AM, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dark matter? Further lols.
>
> Hydrinos aren't supposed to lose their electrons and would be electrically
> charged, and so would still interact with electromagnetic waves. Whereas dark
> matter is... dark... so it can't be electrically charged.
>
> That means it can't have a 3.48keV peak, otherwise it wouldn't be dark! 8-)
>
> If we could actually see dark matter at 3.48 keV, that would be amazing; but
> no.
>
> Incidentally, the proponent of this, Randell Mills is a medical doctor, not a
> doctor of physics.
>
> It's a scam.
>
> You've been had.
>
> Sorry.
>
> On 21 March 2015 at 17:03, James Bowery <jabowery@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> "A broad X-ray peak with a 3.48 keV cutoff was recently observed in the
>> Perseus Cluster by NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory and by the XMMNewton
>> [32-33] that has no match to any known atomic transition. The 3.48 keV
>> feature assigned to dark matter of unknown identity by BulBul et al. [32]
>> matches the 1/4+1/1=>1/17 transition and further confirms hydrinos as the
>> identity of dark matter."
>>
>> http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/Chapter-5_3.5_keV_feature.pdf
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>> A lower ground state of hydrogen that can be reached at low energy?
>>>
>>> Nah.
>>>
>>> If hydrinos existed, huge amounts of hydrogen in the universe should
>>> already be hydrinos. We should be knee deep in the stuff. It should form,
>>> and be very stable.
>>>
>>> Where the heck is all this stuff if it exists?
>>>
>>> Nowhere, because it's nonsense, sorry.
>>>
>>> On 20 March 2015 at 21:52, James Bowery <jabowery@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Erratum: AWG -> AHW (Atomic Hydrogen Welding)
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:50 PM, James Bowery <jabowery@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> Such questions are beyond my competence, which is why my approach is
>>>>> simple:
>>>>>
>>>>> Replace the 2 tungsten electrodes of an AWG rig with titanium and measure
>>>>> the resulting temperature.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the factor of 7 gain reported in the cite obtains, the result should
>>>>> be unambiguous.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 1:46 PM, David Spain <david.l.spain@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/20/2015 1:27 PM, James Bowery wrote:
>>>>>>> Arguing against arithmetic showing specific energy that is orders of
>>>>>>> magnitude lower than nuclear by parading a litany of rhetorical if not
>>>>>>> polemical "wisdom", isn't even wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> James,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is your stand on the viewpoint that because Mills' theory of
>>>>>> fractional Rydberg states are not square-integrable in the Dirac
>>>>>> expression, they are therefore to be considered in the quantum realm as
>>>>>> non-physical? That has been the traditional view at least until Jan
>>>>>> Nault's paper:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0507193.pdf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also don't these n < 1 states lead to non-resonant wave function
>>>>>> solutions? (Isn't that just another way of stating the above?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -Ian Woollard
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -Ian Woollard
Other related posts: