On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 3:31 AM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote:
> Well Frank, such ideas have value only when they show why and how most > observed behaviors occur and how to make the behavior occur more > consistently and at higher levels. All theories I know about met only a > small fraction of this requirement. > It is funny, just contributed a post to this subject at another list, the only other list I was on. In the opinion of a poster and myself with a big fat "ME TOO" post the key to coming up with a theory that fits everything is to simply put yourself in the way of as much evidence and information as possible, have as little opinion of how things work so you can just let whatever if there impact you however long it takes don't reach for this, just wait for something to hit you no matter how odd and no matter how fuzzy the picture might be, don't try and force this picture to fit already established concepts. That picture for me started of as an extraordinarily fuzzy yet compelling image and has now come into some acceptable detail though not enough for any equations so I doubt that any scientist not willing to listen to a ton of crackpot experiments and observations from nature as evidence would find any interest in it. > If you can have better success in this requirement, your theory will have > value. > Most theories are useful guides and do suggest useful approaches, but the > use of assumptions to allow the data to be fit, i.e. to allow a claim to be > made for predictions of behavior, greatly reduces the value. If I > understand your approach, you use conventional and accepted theory to arrive > at a new constant, which you assume is as fundamental as Planck's constant. > You claim that the logic associated with this constant allows you to make > novel predictions. You may be right. However, I would like to know, based > on your model, exactly which kinds of atoms and how I need to arrange them > in a solid or living cell to cause a nuclear reaction to be initiated, i.e. > how the Coulomb barrier is overcome. Also, I would like to know how the > resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. If > you can answer these questions without too many assumptions, I would be > interested. > > Ed > > On Jun 18, 2009, at 9:06 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > The theory has left the amateur level of ideas and entered the level of the > trained professional. This is also progress > Ed > > So, individually, we stand almost no chance of contributing anything to > cold fusion, nor has any particularly practical way been conceived to power > a vehicle with it.(??!) > > Not so I am an amateur and I am going to add to the new understanding > produced by this process. > My introduction to be published by IE. in sept. > > Max Planck’s constant qualifies the angular momentum of the stationary > atomic state.9 The path of the transitional quantum state has been > unknown. Albert Einstein described the energy of a photon with Planck’s > constant.3 Niels Bohr applied these ideas to the atomic structure. Bohr’s > quantum condition states that the angular momentum carried by a stationary > atomic orbit is a multiple of Planck’s constant.2 The quantization of > angular momentum is a postulate, underivable from deeper law. Its > validity depends on the agreement with experimental spectra. Werner > Heisenberg and Erwin Schrödinger extended these ideas and qualified the > intensity of a spectral emission. These great scientists found that the > frequency and the amplitude of the emitted photon is a function of the > differential in energy through which the electron drops. The frequency and > amplitude of a classical wave is that of the emitter. The correspondence > principle was invented in an attempt to explain this discrepancy. It states > the frequency and amplitude of a classical system is equivalent to the > energy drop within a quantum system. These constructs form the foundation > of modern physics. The structure built upon this foundation considers the > classical regime to be a subset of the quantum realm. > > Frank Znidarsic’s constant Vt qualifies the velocity of the transitional > quantum state. The transitional velocity is coupled with a frequency and > a displacement. The energy levels of the atom were shown, in the body of > this paper, to be a condition of the transitional frequency. The > intensity of spectral emission was shown to be a function of the > transitional amplitude. The action of the transitional quantum state > replaces the principle of quantum correspondence. An extension of this > work would universally swap Planck’s and Znidarsic’s constants. There would > have to be a compelling reason make this change as it would confound the > scientific community. There are two good reasons for doing so. Velocity > is a classical parameter. The structure built upon this foundation > considers the quantum regime to be a subset of the classical realm. > Znidarsic’s > constant describes the progression of an energy flow. An understanding of > this progression may lead to the development of many new technologies. > > > ------------------------------ > Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal > Everyday!<http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222677718x1201465083/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215692163%3B38015526%3Be> > > >
