Bizarre "Dark Fluid" with Negative Mass

Well, the first thing to look at is units. The units of c³ is m³/sec³, volume is m³, and mass is kg. I don't see how these units can fit in the equation. Is there another constant of nature in there?

Well that's what we need to figure out, what is the relationship of space expansion to matter entering black holes, will give the matter to negative dark energy volume conversion giving us the constant we need to take the next step...Maybe this has been done already...? It would be interesting to know if the volume of matter entering black holes is increasing, decreasing, or constant...?

You might want to take a *hard* look at the GUTCP of Dr. Randell Mills. Find it at the website for Brilliantlightpower.com

This Unified theory resolves, curiously enough, about 95% of the errors in "modern" physics.

"The electricity producing SunCell® uses a catalyst to cause hydrogen atoms of water molecules to transition to the lower-energy Hydrino® states by allowing their electrons to fall to smaller radii around the nucleus. "

https://brilliantlightpower.com/

This would work if Quantum Mechanics is wrong. According to QM, the electron cannot occupy a lower energy state than the lowest orbital.

QM has been around for a long time, and nobody's proven it wrong yet. Even when it makes totally no sense, it still turns out to be right!

Ah so...

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/quantum-physics/atoms-and-electrons/v/bohr-model-radii

The model of the atom that we were taught in grade school science class with the electrons circling the nucleus like planets around the sun is a gross simplification.

Here is my understanding. There is an energy well created by the attraction of the positive nucleus and the electrons that keeps the electrons contained within a small volume. Each electron trapped in this energy well has a Schrodinger wavelength inversely proportional to its momentum. The square of the amplitude of the wavefunction is the probability of finding the electron at any particular location. (Note: There are interactions between electrons, so only the Hydrogen atom with a single electron is simple to analyze.)

These wavelengths fit inside the energy well just as the wavelengths of sound vibration fit the dimensions of a vibrating bell. Like a bell, there is no mode of vibration lower than the fundamental mode.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital

So is the hydrogen atom at its lowest energy as part of a water molecule? What then happens as it gets colder?

Of course water expands as it cools to 4 deg C then expands as it cools to zero deg C. All that is not a function of the "size" of the hydrogen molecule but is to do with the water molecule being highly polarized. An interesting phenomena but perhaps not helpful in any examination of basic particle physics.

Of hydrogen by itself, I'd start by considering the possibility of a cooler temperature meaning smaller molecule and lower orbits but with the same "harmonic" electron frequency, and also less energy - but that seems to be problematical as a change in length with the same frequency implies something akin to a change in the speed of light, so not a good idea.

If we consider hydrogen molecules in a "box" we do know that the physical pressure will be lower with a lower temperature, and with less black body radiation - how to interpret that ?

A reasonable interpretation (consistent I think with "Only Space Time") is that energy is exchanged between the internal energy of a compressed or distorted hydrogen molecule with no overall kinetic motion, and its undistorted free-self with motional kinetic energy and "standard" or "rest" internal energy.

Physical pressure in the real world could be considered to result from either (1) being the ratio of time the molecule spends compressed compared with its uncompressed state OR (2) the molecule spending 50% of its time compressed and or uncompressed but experiencing greater internal stress or energy increase and alternatively greater KE as the temperature increased.

In the case of 2, if there is "infinitely adjustable" are required to meet each minute change in temperature and correspondingly there also needs to be infinitely adjustable levels of internal energy. Physics does not allow for that as electrons jump in a quantized manner.

This points to the type 1 phenomena being correct,

A simple physical analogy suggests a type 1 phenomena might be achieved by the orbit of the electron being distorted from circular to oval, so having the same length, and also acting like a spring so that as temperature went (say) up, the distortion would increase and the time in a distorted state with it so that the fraction of time in the "distorted" state would increase, but with the movement velocity or KE of the molecule as a whole staying constant. and the frequency of interaction much the same.

So what is the balancing quantity if near everything bar temperature is a constant - the answer is that black body radiation as a "force" at the fundamental level is the the same as physical force in the real physical world.

Cooling water causes the molecules to slow down.

The electrons in an atom can only be at a number of energy levels, modes of vibration of the wavefunction. An electron can absorb a photon and move to a higher level. If there is an available lower energy level, it can drop to that level and emit a photon. It's called fluorescence.

When there are no open lower levels, every electron is at its lowest level and no more energy can be extracted from the atom.

Sorry I meant hydrogen electron...Is the hydrogen electron at it's lowest energy level, meaning Bohr model, of -13.6 eV, when it's part of a water molecule...?

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/quantum-physics/atoms-and-electrons/v/bohr-model-energy-levels

.Is the hydrogen electron at it's lowest energy level, meaning Bohr model, of -13.6 eV, when it's part of a water molecule...?

Good question. I would say the answer is yes, unless you are radiating that water with short UV (122, 103, 97, 95, 94, ... nanometer radiation, as shown in the figure below).

Electron transitions and their resulting wavelengths for hydrogen. Energy levels are not to scale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_spectral_series

As a point of reference, it takes 5.15 electron volts to break the O-H bond in water.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond-dissociation_energy

The amount of thermal energy is way too small. 1 electron volt is equivalent to 11604 degrees Kelvin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronvolt

Well then I have to ask, can a water molecule be split with a 122 nm laser? If so, what level of wattage to reach that point? ...and how would that work with the anode cathode setup to separate the gases..? Would we need an additional laser for the oxygen atom...?..or would we just need something to absorb the oxygen...perhaps steel wool...

..."Electrolysis of water is the decomposition of water into oxygen and hydrogen gas due to the passage of an electric current. The reaction has a standard potential of −1.23 V, meaning it ideally requires a potential difference of 1.23 volts to split water."...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water

https://www.sciencealert.com/new-water-splitting-methods-could-unlock-hydrogen-s-green-energy-potential

Mea Culpa: In #13, the analysis is for a hydrogen atom in isolation, and cannot be applied to a hydrogen atom in a water molecule.

Far different from a hydrogen atom, the electron density for an isolated water molecule might look like this:

http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_molecule.html

As for using a laser to dissociate water, I'm thinking it's been done but is not economical.

http://www.academia.edu/23201323/Two-photon_ionization_and_dissociation_of_liquid_water_by_powerful_laser_UV_radiation

So it definitely works according to this 1982 study, it just needs some serious tweaking to tune the efficiency...I wonder if any later studies have been conducted....?

My university physics does not take me far in this sort of discussion but the one theory I am aware of that really does seem to hold promise so far as I understand it is that by John A Macken at http://onlyspacetime.com/ - which is a large pdf. Macken is not just some crackpot. I understand that he is a professor or the like with patents to his name.

The essentials of Mackens theory is that with a basic building block of sub planck length, and a few assumptions, Macken derives most of the quantum physics relationships as well as those for Einstien and Newton and including for gravity.

His question, "if the universe is expanding, then where is all the energy coming from", is a good one, and I like the fact that Macken's theory is consistent with Ocam's Razor.

The "blow your mind" conclusion in that theory is that, "the universe is shrinking" - and it publishes a value for that contraction that seems reasonable.

<...Who can improve on this theory?...>

ralfcis probably can, but please use the personal messaging system rather than the main forum...