relativistic quantum numbers 1/137 to 137

[froarty]

The theory that Casimir cavities represent an abrupt equivalence boundary is not new, In 2002 a paper "Vacuum fluctuation force on a rigid Casimir cavity in a gravitational field" by Italian researchers Enrico Calloni, Luciano Di Fiore, Giampiero Esposito, Leopoldo Milano, Luigi Rosa discusses the possibility of verifying the equivalence principle for the zero-point energy of quantum electrodynamics, by evaluating the force, produced by vacuum fluctuations, acting on a rigid Casimir cavity in a weak gravitational field.

In 2005 a math paper by Jan Naudts contends that fractional quantum state argument against hydrino state overlooks relativistic solutions

 

In 2007 Ronald Bourgoin published a paper that showed the general wave equation predicts exactly the 137 inverse principal quantum levels.

 

animation and additional information

 

I just assume N =1 to be 45 degree for flat space to share space time dimensions equally.

velocity approaches C on spatial axis( x=volume), Time axis is suppressed (event horizon), velozity all in X axis with little or no Y component

velocity approaches C on time axis (y= time), Volume axis is suppressed (Casimir cavity). velocity all in Y axis with little or no X component

Edited August 22, 2009 by froarty
spelling

[swansont]

In 2007 Ronald Bourgoin published a paper that showed the general wave equation predicts exactly the 137 inverse principal quantum levels.

 

I see where he sets v=c, but no relativistic treatment of anything. That would seem to be a serious shortcoming.

 

In truth, the real unanswered question is why only a few select people can observe these states.

[froarty]

I see where he sets v=c, but no relativistic treatment of anything. That would seem to be a serious shortcoming.

 

In truth, the real unanswered question is why only a few select people can observe these states.

 

I have emailed Ron for comment but I did notice early on he suppresses the time in equation (4) by use of a substitution. I am assuming his fractional values do not specify a time coordinate, or not necessarily the “same” time coordinate? My intuition is that his math solves for all possible solutions without specifying the environment which is why I cite the paper "Vacuum fluctuation force on a rigid Casimir cavity in a gravitational field" from Italian researchers Di fiore et all that establishes an equivalence boundary inside a cavity vs outside. Very weak and representing a depletion zone instead of concentration zone like a gravity well. The cavity varies the relativistic perspective of hydrogen inside Vs an external observer.

 

I also received this criticism regarding Naudts work "You can use Klein-Gordon to describe a system of photons, but you unequivocally cannot use Klein-Gordon to describe the electron. It is why you must go the Dirac equation. The Dirac equation properly describes spin ½ particles in a potential. Once you do that all of the fractional quantum states magically disappear! " - I don't disagree with this but I think the restriction may not apply relativistically. Perhaps the electron appears like a spin 1 particle when displaced by 90 degrees and allows for K-G.

 

I did modify my trig to reflect a perspective from 1N to 1/137N in either direction. Even for being speculative I should have realized Lorentz contraction is absolute change in distance in either direction.

http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/blog/7200-lorentz-multiplier-quantum-states-24437.html

[froarty]

In a new blog http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/comment/reply/25072

I have found an argument for use of both K-G and Poincare equations in a 1996 paper "Cavity QED* " by Zofia Bialynicka-Birula which addresses this with the destruction of isotropy inside a cavity and resulting effect on invariance under transformations of the Poincare group. It leads me to suggest the math is correct but their interpretation is wrong in that the Bohr radius is never violated locally and solves from a relativistic perspective. Add to this the theory that space inside a Casimir cavity has equivalent acceleration ( or maybe "de-acceleration" would be more appropriate) which was first attributed to Di Fiore et all in a 2002 paper "Vacuum fluctuation force on a rigid Casimir cavity in a gravitational field". They proposed the possibility of verifying the equivalence principle for the zero-point energy of quantum electrodynamics, by evaluating the force, produced by vacuum fluctuations, acting on a rigid Casimir cavity in a weak gravitational field. Their calculations show a resulting force has opposite direction with respect to the gravitational acceleration, their calculations indicate an equivalent acceleration between the gravitational field "falling” outside the cavity relative to inside the cavity. This force of only 10 E^-14 N appears inconsequential but it is a constant acceleration which accumulates velocity in opposition to diatomic confinement common in Pd membranes and Casimir cavities. No effect on regular H2 but I propose it rips apart H2 trying to form from higher velocity relativistic H1.

 

Best Regards

 

Fran