The hydrino was defined by Dr Randell Mills to have a frational ground state where the orbital is up to 137 times smaller than the normal minimum for hydrogen. Mills’ hydrino has been rejected by mainstream physics but he has succeeded in producing surplus heat as confirmed by Rowan Univercity. A relativistic interpertation for the Hydrino was suggested in a paper by Jan Naudts in 2005. while Naudts proposal was better received in the Physics community his paper only solved for a nuclear event magnitudes higher than the 137 fractional quantum states claimed by Mills. A math paper from Ron Bourgoin in 2007 supports exactly the 137 fractional quantum states claimed by Mills but due to the equations employed, only from a “relativistic” perspective. The math of both Naudts and Bourgoin was controversial because they used equations normally reserved for photons which can occupy the same space and state. Using these equations for electrons dictates relativisitic conditions where electrons can appear to occupy the same spatial location to an observer in a different inertial frames. Therefore the math is correct but only applies to atoms at different energy levels inside a Casimir cavity. This is sometimes refered to as negative energy because the Casimir plates are “sinking” energy relative to the ambient by restricting more and more of the longer wavelength vacuum fluctuations inversely proportional to plate spacing.

The paper Cavity QED by Zofia Bialynicka-Birula proposes a broken isotropy of the gravitational field and a varying equivalence boundary based on the very local Casimir geometry of the plates. This paper allows for Bourgoins use of equations normally reserved for full spin particles instead of the Dirac equations where the fractional state solutions would fall away. The constant change in Casimir force with changes in local geometry results in numerous inertial frames and time dilation allowing electron orbitals to appear spatially coincident to an observer outside the cavity. Mills hydrogen orbital is not actually getting smaller but is exhibiting lorentzian contraction. Locally the hydrogen orbitals see themselves and nearby orbitals as normal radius but from outside the cavity we observe them contracted, appearing 137 different shades of smaller and seemingly able to occupy the same “spatial” coordinates similar to photons. Mills should redefine the hydrino radius in terms of Lorentzian contraction to eliminate this needless controversey. There are also relativistic phenomena such as “field pancaking” that would make such concepts as his “orbitsphere” more acceptable to the mainstream.

Present theory calls the suppression of long vacuum fluctuations and replacement with shorter vacuum fluctuations inside the cavity as “up converting”. It was established by Casimir – Polder that longer wavelength Vacuum fluctuations inside a cavity are restricted as the plates get closer because they must equal a whole number of wavelengths of the decreasing space between the plates. Normal QED theory states that the displaced longer wavelength fluctuations are replaced with shorter wavelength fluctuations. A relativistic interpretation however states that the longer wavelength fluctuations never go away, instead the Casimir force dilates time inside the cavity to simply make the longer wavelengths appear shorter from our perspective outside the cavity. Likewise hydrogen atoms diffused in this same cavity are also seen from a relativistic profile. Bourgoins’ math only solves for fractional quantum states that can never be measured physically using a formula derived from the time dilation constant gamma.

Casimir cavities represent a zone where the “energy content” varies inversely to the spacing between the cavity walls or “plates”. QED call this “up conversion” where the longer wavelengths of quantum fluctuations are displaced in favor of shorter wavelengths that can fit a whole number of times in the narrow cavity. The blog “Vacuum or zero point energy and quantum fluctuations” seems to confirm that time inside a volume of space appears slower whenever the total energy summation of vacuum fluctuations is varied during particle pair creation and annihilation. The quantum Casimir effect creates a permanent example of this imbalance where longer vacuum fluctuations are displaced and therefore changes the total energy relative to an observer outside the cavity. This seems to confirm work in Cavity QED that proposes a Casimir cavity breaks gravitational isotropy and work by Jan Naudts that fractional quantum state hydrogen inside a cavity is actually a relativistic effect. I have been trying to convince people that the QED theory of “up-conversion” could be interpreted to conform with Jans “relativistic” solution where the longer wavelength vacuum fluctuations are never really displaced but rather turn on an arc where we 3 dimensional beings can only see the cord length of the fluctuation. This would put a new twist on our perception of catalytic action and even the suppression of spontaneous emissions in a waveguide based on time dilation.

Papers by Christian Beck and Michael Mackey “Measureability of vacuum fluctuations and dark energy” and “Electromagnetic dark energy” propose virtual photons with frequency less than 2 THz are more gravitationally active than those above. **Because “up conversion” means fewer long wavelength fluctuations between narrowing cavity walls this can be stated as increasing the ratio of short to long fluctuations inside the cavity**. If this is taken in context with work by Zofia in “Cavity QED” proposing a break in gravitational isotropy then the Casimir cavity becomes a gravity “hill” having fewer gravitationally active fluctuations while a gravity “well” obviously has a higher concentration of fluctuations below 2THZ. This gravitational anomally is just another manifestation of the time dilation discussed in the previous paragraph. Time and gravity and even orbital radius of diffused atoms all appear normal to local inertial frames inside the cavity.

We know that Casimir cavities restrict longer flux relative to what we consider normal outside the cavity just as we restrict longer flux in flat space relative to what an observer approaching an event horizon would consider normal (we appear to age rapidly to an observer approaching an event horizon just as hydrogen in a Casimir cavity appears to age faster relative to us outside the cavity). the spacing between Casimir plates approaches the limit of 3d space (approaching the 2-d limit ) creating a reservoir from which the metal lattice arrangement of the plates draw down and deplete. This creates a balance of depletion and concentration zones between the plate lattice structure and the narrow cavity which allows us to accumulate these quantum depletion zones into a detectable macro break in gravitational isotropy. This non vanishing quantum effect between the plates is exploited by gas diffusing in the cavity which experiences time dilation when exposed to these segregated depletion zones without experiencing the opposing fields dispersed throughout the plates. It is only the QED interpretation of “up conversion” that has led to fractional quantum states claimed by Dr Mills of Black Light Power Although Mills’ does not even mention Casimir cavities, he diffuses hydrogen into the skeletal catalyst Rayney Nickel which has pores meeting the geometry requirements for Casimir cavities. This implies strongly that all catalytic action is powered via Casimir geometry regardless if cavities or outcroppings or even liquid or solid (although solid rigid plates appear needed to produce heat instead of just accelerated reactions). I am proposing that Casimir force is the engine behind all catalytic reactions.

Mills’ also proposed that hydrogen makes a non radiative translation to the hydrino state. This is consistent with a change in perspective vs a true change in orbital radius. He also makes frequent mention of “fast” hydrogen which is much more in line with what Jan Naudts proposed as relativistic hydrogen in a 2005 paper “On the hydrino state of relativistic hydrogen atom” His paper inspired Ronald Bourgoin to propose papers in 2006 and 2007 that solved for the hydrino as a math construction, It showed the relative perspective between inertial frames accounted for exacttly the 137 (non-radiative) fractional states claimed by Mills. Bourgoin should have emphasized the relativistic nature of his solutions which would have put an early end to the misidentification of the hydrino as a “real” sub ground state atom when it is in fact only a math construct to measure between different inertial frames.

The big gorilla in the room however remains a possible linkage to vacuum fluctuations. If the relativistic nature is as I propose then the odd spectrum Black Light plasma documented in numerous reports may valuable as a drive mechanism. My theory is that the appropriate geometry of rigid cavity material such as Rayney Nickel restricts the equivalent velocity of relativistic H2 the moment it forms inside a Casimir cavity. the vacuum flux immediately form strong boundaries against the atomic orbitals and tear the compound apart which restores the atoms to monatomic values, reduces relative velocity to outside the cavity and frees the atoms to resume relative acceleration (note local plate geometries inside the cavity mute time and therefore gravity from the external field creating a differential acceleration, essentially dragging behind the ambient field outside the cavity). They are free to repeat this process endlessly in cascade. The energy source is the Casimir effect on time and gravity which would also explain the spectrum shift of the plasma and the ability of energy release to exceed chemical combustion of hydrogen. The broken isotropy of the Casimir cavity allows reactants to “fall” behind the outside gravitational field and rapidly builds relative acceleration resulting in the time dilation which IMHO is actually the basis of catalytic action. The “rigid” Casimir tears apart relativistic hydrogen molecules creating -plasma – suggesting a mechanical linkage between vacuum fluctuaions and matter. an ionized powdered form of these “rigid” cavities could be accelerated through axial coils or swept around inside large plates to create relative motion between the plasma emitting cavities and the vacuum fluctuations.

SEE MOST RECENT BLOG

notes:

the attractive components of Casimir force have a slightly stronger impact than the repulsive ones. For two perfect, plane, parallel mirrors the Casimir force is therefore attractive and the mirrors are pulled together. The force, F, is proportional to the cross-sectional area, A, of the mirrors and increases 16-fold every time the distance, d, between the mirrors is halved: F ~ A/d4. Apart from these geometrical quantities the force depends only on fundamental values – Planck’s constant and the speed of light. In 1948 H. B. G. Casimir [1] made a prediction that two large, neutral, parallel conducting plates separated by a

distance z in vacuum attract each other with the force per unit area

**P(z) =F(z) / S = -(pi^2 * reduced h * c) / (240* z^4)**

Here reduced h is the reduced Planck constant, c is the velocity of light, and S is the area of the plates. Figure 1 illustrates configuration giving rise to this force which was named after Casimir. The Casimir force is a quantum phenomenon (because it

depends on reduced planks constant) and also the relativistic one (because it depends also on c). In classical electrodynamics, there is no net force acting between uncharged conducting plates. Thus the Casimir force is very unusual. All forces which we know from both classical and quantum physics depend on some charges or interaction constants. For example, electric force acts between charged bodies and depends on their charges. The gravitational force depends on the masses (i.e., the gravitational charges) of interacting bodies. Forces acting between elementary particles depend also on the constants of weak and strong interactions. But the above expression for the Casimir force per unit area of the plates (i.e., for the pressure) does not depend on any interaction constant. It depends on only the fundamental constants reduced planks and c and on the separation distance z which is the geometrical parameter. The magnitudes of the Casimir pressure are characteristic for macroscopic rather than for microscopic scales. For example, at a separation z = 1 ?m it holds P = 1.3mPa which is not a small pressure as one could expect for a quantum phenomenon.

Comments are closed.