Archive for February, 2019

Towards the Second Industrial Revolution

February 28, 2019

Many thanks to Doug and Steve Bannister! George Bernard Shaw wrote that “If you teach a man anything he will never learn”. He meant that one must learn for oneself. I would have thought that the slightest chance of a second industrial revolution should be pursued with all despatch, using Naval language. The dogmatist who goes through a career regurgitating half learnt fog will sink with the rest of us. They would be most to blame. I also think that Horst’s contributions are very important, and always inductive, in that every new idea is checked carefully and developed with accuracy, the inductive method illustrated with important graphics. The entire AIAS / UPITEC group has made important contributions and has made its lasting mark on history. The feedback shows that with great accuracy over sixteen years. There are only a very few enlightened minds in any era, most of humankind would happily destroy all the forests of the world and let the starving masses eat cake.

I too Steve shake my finger at the entire physics community. Thity years….has it rally been that long. Once again industry (inventors and technicians) are pushing the envelop whereas the educated institutions (so called) are still dragging their feet. It took the better part of a career for me, and a couple of open minded scientists named Myron and Horst, to get rid of the fence or box that education provided. To the young, challenge the fences and tear them down. Your teachers are quite likely wrong.

Doug

On Feb 28, 2019, at 12:11 AM, Myron Evans <myronevans123> wrote:

Pion and Particle Masses from the m Theory

Many thanks indeed to Steve Bannister! MIT staff and students frequently consult www.aias.us and the fact that the LENR conference is taking place at MIT means that LENR has arrived center (centre) stage. The State and University of Utah takes full credit. MIT is frequently in the world’s top three universities, often number one in the world. The State of Utah could reopen a LENR Institute in the University of Utah.

Pion and Particle Masses from the m Theory

Hello Myron,

Incredible work, but I do believe. Sometimes I have to shake my head over morning coffee to make sure I am reading what I am reading.

I just found this youtube of the Fleischmann and Pons news conference; it’s long but so much history: https://youtu.be/6CfHaeQo6oU

Next month is the 30th anniversary of the news conference. MIT is holding a special LENR/LANR conference to memorialize.

Many thanks for helping to forge the future.

Steve

Stephen C. Bannister, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Economics Director, MIAGE Associate Director, Economic Evaluation Unit, Macroeconomics University of Utah Open calendar at: https://bit.ly/2vFymyY

On 2/27/2019 7:32 AM, Myron Evans wrote:

Final Note for UFT432

February 28, 2019

This will be based on working out all the terms that contribute to the semi classical interaction, along the lines of UFT247 to UFT249. There are many terms and a rich mass spectrum.

Towards a New Nuclear Physics

February 28, 2019

Many thanks to Gareth for this observation of flash boiling of palladium. It is now known that the mechanism for this is m theory. The details of the application of the theory are different for each experiment but the principles are now known. It is quite possible that the entire standard model of nuclear physics will soon be replaced by the much simpler and more powerful m theory. SPAWAR staff frequently consult http://www.aias.us.

Corrigendum

February 28, 2019

Corrigendum

Many thanks to Doug Lindstrom!

Horst, Myron:

I think a factor of 2 is missing from the potential in

UFT432(2). Equation 17

UFT 431. Equation 13

stemming from UFT 239 equation 29, the equation for the potential inside a distributed spherical charge.

Should it be

Vc= Z1 Z2 e^2 (3- (r/R)^2) / 2

with the factor of 2 necessary for Vc inside sphere to equal Vc outside sphere when r=R.

Doug

Suggested LENR Institute in Univ. Utah

February 28, 2019

Many thanks indeed to Steve Bannister! MIT staff and students frequently consult www.aias.us and the fact that the LENR conference is taking place at MIT means that LENR has arrived center (centre) stage. The State and University of Utah take full credit. MIT is frequently in the world’s top three universities, often number one in the world. The State of Utah could reopen a LENR Institute in the University of Utah.

Pion and Particle Masses from the m Theory

Hello Myron,

Incredible work, but I do believe. Sometimes I have to shake my head over morning coffee to make sure I am reading what I am reading.

I just found this youtube of the Fleischmann and Pons news conference; it’s long but so much history: https://youtu.be/6CfHaeQo6oU

Next month is the 30th anniversary of the news conference. MIT is holding a special LENR/LANR conference to memorialize.

Many thanks for helping to forge the future.

Steve

Stephen C. Bannister, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Economics Director, MIAGE Associate Director, Economic Evaluation Unit, Macroeconomics University of Utah Open calendar at: https://bit.ly/2vFymyY

On 2/27/2019 7:32 AM, Myron Evans wrote:

Book of Scientometrics Updated to 26/2/19

February 28, 2019

This is the last day of the month so the Book of Scientometrics is updated to 26/2/19 because it takes two days for the statistics to come through, being a very complex data gathering procedure. There was the usual intense worldwide interest, most of it from the best universities in the world in the universities and institutes sector. Of the world’s top twenty universities there were consultations or repeat consultations(*) from: Berkeley, Princeton*, Illinois Urbana Champaign*, MIT, Cambridge*, Oxford, Edinburgh* and University College London.

BSlatestFeb16-262019.PDF

Daily Report 26/2/19

February 28, 2019

The equivalent of 781,404 printed pages was downloaded (2.849 gigabytes) from 3,351 downloaded memory files (hits) and 420 distinct visits each averaging 6.3 memory pages and 8 minutes, printed pages to hits ratio 233.19, top referrals total 2,645,867, 68% spiders mainly from Amazon, Baidu, Google and MSN. Apple Inc. spidering; University of California Berkeley UFT177; New York University UFT313; Princeton University general; University College London UFT213, British Library extensive download. Intense interest all sectors, webalizer file attached.

www.aias.us/new_stats/

Fwd: Pion and Particle Masses from the m Theory

February 27, 2019

Many thanks, this is is a very important insight, getting rid of a lot of foggy dogma and replacing it with enlightenment.
Pion and Particle Masses from the m Theory

Many thanks for this explanation which gives a much clearer picture now. It dawns on me how particle collisions can be interpreted by m theory. Assume that the wave function of a particle has three internal maxima. Bombardind a particle with a smaller one then will give three different appearent masses, dependent on which of the maxima has been met (in a non-central collision). This may determine different decay channels and also explain the “quarks” which may be nothing else than sum rules for the inner geometry of paricles.

Horst

Am 27.02.2019 um 08:17 schrieb Myron Evans:

Pion and Particle Masses from the m Theory

Thanks for this check, as you know equation (31) contains many terms, in direct analogy with the semi classical theory of the interaction of the electron with an electromagnetic field developed in many UFT papers. Eq. (31) is the semi classical interaction of the proton with the strong field. The pion momentum k is analogous to eA where A is the vector potential. Eq (33) is the proton term, and is the first of many terms to be considered. The pion terms are due to be considered at a later stage. Eq. (33) already produces energy levels, and these are different masses through the traditional mass energy equivalence used in the old physics, m = E / c squared. This is modified in m theory to m = E /(m(r) half c squared). So the term (33) already produces several masses, in particle physics mass is usually measured in electron volts, i.e. in terms of energy. In a collider in which a proton collides with a neutron, these masses or energies would be products of the collision. Similar reasoning holds for low energy nuclear reactions between a proton and a neutron. As you know, Dirac considered the interaction of an electron with a magnetic field represented by the classical vector potential. This procedure produces the g factor of the electron, spin orbit interaction theory, and electron spin resonance, the Darwin term and higher order terms. To consider the interaction of an electron with another electron, the process is mediated by a classical, radiated electromagnetic field, radiated from the transmitter, and arriving at the receiver. The semi classical theory of this note can be considered to describe the classical electromagnetic field interacting with the receiver modelled as a Dirac electron. In quantum field theory the electromagnetic field is also quantized into photons, so the interaction between two electrons is mediated by a photon. In the old physics the photon was a virtual photon, but in m theory it is a real photon. So p can be interpreted as the electron and q the photon momentum. Total energy and momentum are conserved. The transmitter loses photon momentum q, and the receiver gains photon momentum q. So p1 + p2 = p3 +p4, where p3 = p1 – k, p4 = p2 + k. The same equation applies to the interaction between proton and neutron mediated by the m force, which quantizes to the pions. There are three pions with three different energy levels. The general theory of this process was first developed in UFT248 with Doug Lindstrom. So that paper can be generalized to m theory and dealt with any number of products of collision or low energy nuclear interaction. It becomes clear that teh semi classical theory can describe any products of an atom smasher or LENR. In the first instance consider the free particle Schroedinger quantization and apply m theory to it and extra energy levels appear as you showed in the Lamb shift calculation with m theory.

Pion and Particle Masses from the m Theory

In eq.(33) the contributions of bold k have been neglected. How can this equation then relate to the pion? It seems to relate to the neutron or proton. Eq. (35) is the same as we have already used for the Lamb shift.

Horst

Am 26.02.2019 um 08:07 schrieb Myron Evans:

Pion and Particle Masses from the m Theory

February 27, 2019

Thanks for this check, as you know equation (31) contains many terms, in direct analogy with the semi classical theory of the interaction of the electron with an electromagnetic field developed in many UFT papers. Eq. (31) is the semi classical interaction of the proton with the strong field. The pion momentum k is analogous to eA where A is the vector potential. Eq (33) is the proton term, and is the first of many terms to be considered. The pion terms are due to be considered at a later stage. Eq. (33) already produces energy levels, and these are different masses through the traditional mass energy equivalence used in the old physics, m = E / c squared. This is modified in m theory to m = E /(m(r) half c squared). So the term (33) already produces several masses, in particle physics mass is usually measured in electron volts, i.e. in terms of energy. In a collider in which a proton collides with a neutron, these masses or energies would be products of the collision. Similar reasoning holds for low energy nuclear reactions between a proton and a neutron. As you know, Dirac considered the interaction of an electron with a magnetic field represented by the classical vector potential. This procedure produces the g factor of the electron, spin orbit interaction theory, and electron spin resonance, the Darwin term and higher order terms. To consider the interaction of an electron with another electron, the process is mediated by a classical, radiated electromagnetic field, radiated from the transmitter, and arriving at the receiver. The semi classical theory of this note can be considered to describe the classical electromagnetic field interacting with the receiver modelled as a Dirac electron. In quantum field theory the electromagnetic field is also quantized into photons, so the interaction between two electrons is mediated by a photon. In the old physics the photon was a virtual photon, but in m theory it is a real photon. So p can be interpreted as the electron and q the photon momentum. Total energy and momentum are conserved. The transmitter loses photon momentum q, and the receiver gains photon momentum q. So p1 + p2 = p3 +p4, where p3 = p1 – k, p4 = p2 + k. The same equation applies to the interaction between proton and neutron mediated by the m force, which quantizes to the pions. There are three pions with three different energy levels. The general theory of this process was first developed in UFT248 with Doug Lindstrom. So that paper can be generalized to m theory and dealt with any number of products of collision or low energy nuclear interaction. It becomes clear that teh semi classical theory can describe any products of an atom smasher or LENR. In the first instance consider the free particle Schroedinger quantization and apply m theory to it and extra energy levels appear as you showed in the Lamb shift calculation with m theory.

Pion and Particle Masses from the m Theory

In eq.(33) the contributions of bold k have been neglected. How can this equation then relate to the pion? It seems to relate to the neutron or proton. Eq. (35) is the same as we have already used for the Lamb shift.

Horst

Am 26.02.2019 um 08:07 schrieb Myron Evans:

Final Version of Note 432(3) on the m theory of lattice forces.

February 27, 2019

Many thanks. This is an excellent result after checking, and shows that a proton can be absorbed into a lattice, as indicated in the papers sent on my Alex Hill. This result after the meticulous checking by co author Horst Eckardt gives a clue how low energy nuclear reactions can take place. So LENR is no longer “controversial” as they say and the State of Utah was right to fund cold fusion in its early years. The University of Utah, notably Professor Steve Bannister of the Department of Economics, come out of this very well.

432(3).pdf