equivalence of Casimir cavity and catalyst

[froarty]

A team at Cornell University has now filled in an important blank by pinpointing unique sites where the reactions take place on SWCNTs. The scientists showed that the reactions do not occur all along the tubes, but at the ends of the tubes or at defects along the tubes. I suggest this applies equally to all Casimir cavities in that catalytic action will only occur when the distance between the plates changes. A change in fractional quantum states of hydrogen is proposed by both Randell Mills from the perspective of catalysts and by Haisch -Moddel from the perspective of Casimir cavities. The lattice structures of metal catalysts and the cavity sizes of skeletal catalysts both appear to fit the geometry defining Casimir cavities so I have been proposing that a catalyst and Casimir cavity are just different concentrations of the same force and their property sets should be combined. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it IS a duck! Catalysts cause an increase in the number of reactions per unit time while Casimir cavities are posited to cause an atom to transform to fractional quantum states, although here Mills has already accomplished half the task by proposing a fractional state caused by his catalyst Rayney nickel. I propose that by reflection the catalytic ability to accelerate reactants be extended to Casimir cavities. I don't know for sure if this is even challenged and I may be simply stating the obvious but I would like to build on this without being accused of piling up multiple assumptions.

 

To build on the above premise I assume a relativistic solution for the hydrino inspired by Jan Naudts paper (5 August 2005). "On the hydrino state of the relativistic hydrogen atom". The twin travelling near C would perceive the other twin and all physical properties back on earth as occurring at a rate of multiple seconds per second. Additionally Lorentz contraction causes the objects observed by the twin to appear smaller. Fractional quantum state hydrogen already meets these criteria of increased reaction rate and contraction. The argument then becomes whether a Casimir cavity can create equivalence where inside the cavity becomes a protected harbor that views outside the cavity just as we view an event horizon. An observer outside the cavity defines our 1 second per second reference frame to measure differences in "equivalent" acceleration rate between an event horizon or a casimir cavity. I am proposing the rate inside a Casimir cavity from our perspective becomes multiple seconds per second inverse to the Casimir restriction of longer wavelength vacuum fluctuations. This is referred to as "up conversion" by QED and causes the ratio of short to long vacuum fluctuations inside a Casimir cavity to increase as the distance between plates is reduced. By extension I would predict the ratio of short to long vacuum fluctuations approaching an event horizon to decrease.

 

Like the twin approaching C we see matter inside the cavity occurring at multiple seconds per second because we are greatly accelerated by a default time rate (or ratio of vacuum flux) relative to the protected harbor inside the cavity. The difference in rate results in time dilation and Lorentz contraction. The hydrino remains stationary to an observer outside the cavity in XYZ coordinates but not time. the outside of the cavity has equivalent acceleration only a fraction of an event horizon but it still far exceeds the damped acceleration caused inside the cavity by Casimir plates. This creates a delta in acceleration through equivalence with the unlikely property that the observer and the effect can be spatially local and stationary to each other separated by only Casimir plates as opposed to huge gravity wells needed for an event horizon. I am proposing that the change in ratio of short to long vacuum fluctuations which defines a Casimir cavity is evidence for this difference in equivalent acceleration and that we accept time dilation and contraction inside a Casimir exclusion field just like we accept it in an event horizon.

 

 

The Mills theory, Haisch-Moddel patent and my own theory are all quite similar in requiring monatomic gas into a Rigid cavity and then diverge in their explanation of the excess heat. My theory for excess heat diverges when monatomic gas contracts to fractional quantum states and starts to permeate deeper into smaller geometry cavities than the molecular gas. The smaller local geometry further contracts the atom allowing even deeper penetration, It contracts so much further than the molecular gas when an appropriate rigid cavity material is selected that I ignore the molecular gas except as a resivoir for disassociating atoms. Like a Pd membrane in reverse, a fractional state molecule that forms from these tiny atoms in these tiny cavities or lattices becomes confined, essentially trapped inside a membrane. Opposing forces that normally result in catalytic action can now be leveraged to produce heat. Heat and gas law provide motion to the fractional state molecule within the confines of the membrane which varies the Casimir force on the molecule. The froce exerted on the atoms to change fractional state is converted by the molecule to break the covalent bond which pushes the atoms out of confinement long enough to change fractional states before reforming a new fractional molecule, giving off a photon and becoming confined once again. This cycle continues until the atoms escape or the membrane /cavity melts down.

 

Regards

Fran