Jones Beene wrote: > ... > Well - this is provocative, especially the part about the Letts/Cravens > effect, etc but it will take some time to study. > > I hope Mauro will not hesitate to include his own thoughts and criticism. >
I'm in a somewhat similar situation as you are at the moment: I found QRT yesterday. Some of the parallelisms with my ideas struck me. I don't have a formal nuclear physics background to make an informed criticism of QRT. This usually puts me in a paradoxical situation: on one side I'm open minded and free of many of the usual prejudices against novel and "out of the mainstream" ideas and theories. Prejudices that seem to be the distinguishing mark of an academic background. But on the other side, I'm unable to advance in my knowledge, criticism and mathematical development of my own or other's physical theories :-) Now, following my intuition (which is what I'm usually doing in these matters) and logical thinking, I can say that I think Guglinski is on to something. As I myself am with my own ideas. Despite the probable errors on both of them. As a criticism of QRT, I want to mention that it is a relativistic theory. What I would do, if being in the possession of better mathe and nuclear physics backgrounds, is to try to reconcile the neutron model of Guglinski with my model for Gravity, at the same time replacing the components of Relativity theory of Guglinsky's theory with an elastic model for electromagnetism. Suppose for a moment that both Mills hydrino, and Guglinski neutron are correct models, defining in some cases the same underlying physical reality, and in other cases not, or at least, not necessarily. Then the following question arises: What differentiates a Guglinsky neutron from a Mills hydrino, and also from an Hydrogen atom? In spite of other potential differences, what differentiates them is the orbital radius of the electron. And, as the orbital radius changes, the velocity must change also. This velocity increase gives rise to so called "relativistic effects" like mass increase and time dilation, etc. The neutron is then the most compressed of the hydrinos, with a very fast electron (0.92c) and the hydrogen atom is the most elongated case, with a slow electron. There are some velocities that are "forbidden"(the are in reality dinamically "adjusted" to one of the "allowed" levels), due to interference or coupling between waves. And the Zitterbewegung is a signature of that interference or coupling. I would like to read Guglinski's explanation for Cold Fusion, but I'm beginning to imagine it :-) > Apparently no one took Robin up on the suggestion of writing a review. Too > bad. Despite the self-promotion, this is more interesting on first scan (at > least in a few novel points) than a more recently discussed theory here, > which is so obviously in error that the problem (NA) is easier to gloss-over > by proponents than to attempt to reconcile. > I agree. Best regards, Mauro > The "accordion theory" is coincidental to another thread today, but that > often happens on vortex for whatever reason ... (i.e. a strange kind of > synchronicity) > > Jones > > >
