.. ....Many of our goals may be more viable if we have safe cheap atomic power. All the nuclear spins are powered by the strong force. The problem of fusion generators has been that they are trying to use something real light in subatomic physics (the electric field) to hold down the strong force, which has much more power. If mass is just spinning energy, a safer source of atomic power may be found. Instead of the fusion method trying to blast the strong force particles at each other and hoping they slam in just right, here's how I think the spin of the strong force and the centrifugal force may be harnessed. The proton has electric charge, so if the spinning proton was made stable and the electric field connected to the shorter range strong force were found, the atomic power of each proton could be siphoned off at our leisure with much reduced risk of explosion or radioactivity. To make this motor protons could be auto assembled in chains of a few by compounds like now in labs, and the chain would be held stable by pulling on each side so the chain is under tension balanced in traction by the opposite magnetic poles of each proton, alternating. To tap the power an electron beam would go by the spin of the proton doing work by the field so the beam generator on one side and the collector on the other would be wired on the other side all the way around the proton chain to create a net flow of closed circuit power from spin of the proton's field. Protons only are used for the machine because with both protons and neutrons which have opposite strong force fields, they would be more unstable and if a roaming particle hit the chain it would destabilize the machine and cause a nuclear explosion that could then spread to other nearby chains. And the neutrons have no electric charge so they would not have the field to tap out the strong force from the protons. For the same reason fusion power generators are considered safer than fission, since this idea has just protons which are decayed into just hydrogen building blocks, radioactivity would be safe. The original formulas of relativity where it was thought a handful of any mass, not just uranium, would be enough power for a month in the the city would be realized, since the power source of the protons is found in all atoms from all realms, not just uranium or hydrogen. The protons could be seperated with a bit of power for use in the atomic motor and then the much greater power source of the protons themselves would be the power achieved. Or just as with fusion generators hydrogen could be used. Why not just use the atom itself to tap the spin of the protons and neutrons via the arm of the electrons which spin and are attached by the field to the spin of the hadrons in the atom? Because the spin of the center of the atom is random, and the proton and neutron spins mostly cancel, so more of it's wasted. And the distance of a beam close to the links of the motor would not be as much so it would also tap a lot more of the power and be a much more compact power source. It's a much more atomic power source. A usual atom would get some of its spin from the hadrons but mostly the connection wouldn't be nearly so high powered. Even with the protons seperate from the neutrons without shielding there would be a risk of an outside hadron zooming and hitting the chain and causing instability. My solutions are insulating the chains in small lead "cells" or perhaps hadron solids of much higher density (click here). or other shields and making the proton chains of few number of protons. So if the inevitable hadron makes it through the shield, it would cause just a small reaction and the lead would shield this from outside the explosion so even if it were destabilized the radioactivity wouldn't reach the other shielded cells.

.

.

.The applications of atomic spin power would be numerous. It would totally alter the world's economy, for example it would make the billions of tons of gold in the world's oceans finally within reach with a large power source to power the extractors. Instead of trash compactors all rooms could have incinerators that would divide up the compounds of the trash to the level of just hydrogen, or recombine the elements of the trash to any useful compounds we would like, and power a miniature plant that would make for example outfits out of your poly and metal refuse (if the garbage was outside most would be rich, by purchasing more!) No more power company costs. U238 would be boosted to the stars. You would go to the station and pick up a power pack for your Volvo and it would cost as much as ethyl but would power your 400 mph van for years. (In the near term a way to improve electric vehicles has been invented by power packs that they would rent at the station and the already charged packs would be reduced in mass and wait, and a slow charge up from orbit with collectors on the vehicle so wherever they go air they charge!) All goods would be at much lower cost since the shipping cost of trucks on the road and boats on the ocean would be reduced. With a much stronger safe power source like this travel to and from mars and the moon would be much cheaper. The price of just going to mars now is estimated in trillions. The cost of living in space stations is estimated at 1 million per person. Even if the price of the payloads would be solved the risk of explosion or collision would still be so high in space stations that without better plans (see "How And Why To Reduce Overcrowding".) it would be like the early days of dirigibles, sooner or later a big explosion or collision would happen. It's thought even with the US Space Program any big collision or explosion would slow down the program 25 years. It may be a lot better to spend most of our colonization time out of orbit and going to and from the moon and mars with people, the only time people would be inside outer space, all the rest of the time they would be safe and sound in the rooms below the surface, if there is any way to colonize space, I think this is the most viable.(But more room may be found below us to live by digging or blasting out rooms, this and other ways to achieve more room and why I discuss on the site of the link.) Space colouization has been thought possible, this would be more viable than collisions, explosions, radiation and other problems space stations would have, whatever the worth of space stations this would be more. For satellites and such it may be a lot safer and cheaper to do all the repairs of such as TV or cellular satellites by computer-rised machine.

AUTHOR'S P.S This invention I considered of possible reduced value till improved as of November 06, due to more consideration about the field of particles like protons and other hadrons. A main problem is that even if the inner field of hadrons is flexed by the strong force, the outer field of hadrons would spin just at the speed of light. to obey the conversion of the strong force to the usual Emc2 of Einstein. (The "c" is the important number in the equation, it's the conversion number in all of relativity of spinning mass to linear power at just the speed of light. As if you have to speed up all mass to the speed of light to wring all the power out of it.) But motion of the hadron's field is not the same as work, and if the outer charge is always just at the speed of light it would just spin around and not do work. It's in the rest frame of Relativity. This is also a main disproof of the Hydrino Theory of Mills of lots of atomic power from a hydrino "catalyst". If you got usual matter to achieve force changes in the electric field at more distance it would have a huge amount of power constantly being radiated out of the earth. And hydrinos would also change all the spectra of all the stars. The hydrino catalyst must be of some sort of matter but all heavy particles except the proton are unstable and the light particles have been tried and totally found to not be like Mills says in the development of 19th 20th and even 18the century physics, including the Standard Theory. The Hydrino theory would be great but I'm more of faith than not about my disbelief in it! My belief is the centrifugal force of the strong force flexing against the electric field can't make the field go faster than light outside the hadron, so the strong force is limited by the speed of light and the charges in just multiples of the usual 1 or -1 making the speed of light constant by Maxwell's theory with the constant field density of constant charges, so based on Maxwell's belief in a resilient field of light. (The reason you can add more multiples of the electric charge and go at 100%, 200%, 300%....or more of the speed of light with more charges added on is because the spin which much related with the charge, goes at say 15 degrees, 30 degrees, 45 degrees....and so on so as you add more charge none of the added spins go at faster than light. You would have them layered on like this so they would always have the electric field converting the mass to energy in the usual speed of light conversion of Emc2). So if the outer spin is just in motion mostly without much extra atomic power of faster than light it might seem the atomic motor and the molecular conveyor belt motor are disproven.(of the Post "How The Moving Sidewalks...etc." Click Here..)

Although by this idea the atomic motor conveyor may not be feasible except with the outside addition of power for an atomic conveyor belt, the atomic spin motor IS feasible. Actually I now read how when atomic spins are unpaired and the atom is with more spin it has been found to change the specific heat of matter made of the hadrons, this is the same as thermal inertia, and is just inertia and would be explained by the change in speed of the spin but up to a higher (then constant) speed. So the lack of change at this other higher level of power rules out a self powered atomic sidewalk or motor but not an atomic conveyor belt that would have outside electric power.

It would be easy to the construct the atomic motor by self assembling compounds, the improved atomic motor from this caution would have the electron or other beam that would go by the outside of the proton's field and zoom in and actually blend in with the strong force so it would be pick up a lot more of the atomic power collected from the ricochet. In my theory mass is spinning energy, more mass than an electron would spin faster than light deeper in the field. The electron itself may not go faster than light but its wavelength would be changed, and this would be collected for useful power. For more about why the angle of the bevel may be of worth if deep Click Here or read the following memo below on this site. If the proton won't interact by usual outer charges being in the same rest frame, if beveled in it would have more power than relativity would allow by the strong force being stronger than electromagnetism (and its all important electromagnetic speed of light, not that all the mass is not there measured by E=mc2, just that if it's faster than light there's more mass and speed to begin with than relativity would allow. If this motor works in a way it's disproof of relativity).

Considering that both these types of machines would be of huge worth it may be worth looking into by the self assembling compounds biz whizzes. There are some key elements to the proton motor (without which it's unviable) I won't disclose here. The atomic motor is an invention of great worth. For more information of even more knowledge is more power call 276 228 3465..

...

Notarized by Ronnie Rollyson Website Manager

COPYRIGHT 2007-2009 by Charles Fredrick Lawson.

. ~~~~ Main Page.. ~~~~~~.

-

INDEPTH; Why There May Be More Energy For The Atomic Motor if The Angle Is Bevelled Inward To The Radius of The Weak Charges

...

....Since protons and other heavy particles aren't radiating out much energy of the earth if the strong force is 137 times as strong as the electromagnetic field, why is the value of the speed of tunneling by experiment Chin found just 1.2 times the speed of light not 137 times this speed? (Here's why I think Chin may have found proof of faster than light, my physics synopses page, with about 8 or more proofs in favor of Faster than Light, plus how to prove GWD my General Wave Dynamics causology) By F=ma, the more general form of E=mc2 which would apply to all forces and relativity including both gravity and the strong force, this is about linear motion of the lower energy fields (about gravity) and since angular motion is nonlinear, and the opposite, with increased mass density like the value 137, it would seem to go 137 times as fast in angular motion, but Chin's tunnelling speed is slower. There would be this strong force field spinning around much faster than the electric charges, which would just be somewhat lighter and with the fractional charges (a charge of 1/2 would spin at twice the speed of light and a charge of 1/3 could spin around at 3x the speed of light, with these values averaged out to the speed Chin found, you lighten up to travel faster by F=ma).. With the relative motion between the faster strong field (at 137 times the speed of light) and the fractional charges (at 1.2x the speed of light or so) the relative speed of these two waves, the strong force and the fractional electric charges would be large so it would seem there would be much radiation emitted from the earth when the strong force with continual flexing of the slower electric charges. A possible explanation might be about efficiency. There are two sets of two forces in physics. If gravity is like the strong force, as electromagnetism has already been likened to the weak force in the Electroweak theory, by our general savvy about gravity we may see more about why this is true of the strong force than otherwise, so some general conclusions might be drawn. (Gravity can be unified in general with the strong force because both gravity and the strong force are only attractive and longer range than the shorter range centrifugal expansive contact (electromagnetic and weak) forces that stop otherwise indefinite implosion.) Einstein thought gravity waves moved at the speed of light, I believe because it's lighter it may move at much faster than light by F=ma, the density of the gravity m is much lower and you lighten up to travel faster. If either faster than light or just the slower speed Einstein predicted, gravity is much faster as it flows through us than our usual motion of mass at 32 ft. I think this may be explained by inefficiency, certainly there must be extra left over gravity more than entropy to hold the cosmos together so it wouldn't radiate out over infinite time and not violate energy conservation, thus the gravity would flow through us inefficiently with a good bit of extra field flowing without interaction with the mass it flows around, and if the strong force in general outline is like gravity it could also flow past the electric charges of the hadrons as they would spin around without much actual interaction other than just enough to make them go at the predicted speed of my causeology of GWD and lighten up their charges just this much. The strong force can't just implode indefinitely or infinitely, it's implosion must be stopped by some force but not electromagnetism, it's too weak, and the strong force is only implosive, this is why I've often said the real source of the outward expansion of radioactivity and nuclear power isn't the strong force (it's always implosive) rather it's the so called weak force. It's weak at long range, and by this explanation it would be stronger than even the strong force at the source of most mass of the baryon or meson. One good reason to believe the Weak Force is actually strong is because Weak interactions are much faster than electromagnetic reactions. If time is caused by angular momentum because all time is measured by periodic fluxuation and the Weak force is faster, by conservation of angular momentum it spins faster at least "inside". By Relativity the weak interactions could be no faster than electromagnetic interactions at the speed of light. If they are stronger the Weak Interactions may be both faster than light and stronger than all other force. Another good reason to believe the Weak Interaction is strong before renormalization is the neutrino, it's so light and feeble only weak interactions are strong enough to create them. By the electroweak theory the Weak Force behaves much like the electromagnetic force; like this force it has two fermionic charges and a bosonic mediating charge, like plus and minus electric charges and light, respectively. Most importantly, by the electroweak theory it's a contact force that generates friction and does work when squeezed by the strong force, this is how radioactivity is via the longer range only attractive strong force and short range contact expansion of the weak force, like the gravity squeezing out the heat of the earth in the other main action reaction pair of physics. The fractional electric charges may be in their relativistic (inertial) rest frame and the strong force may be mostly inefficient like gravity through us, this would explain why the protons and neutrons may not emit lots of radiation and be radioactive even with faster than light spin allowed. (Usual probes being themselves made mostly of electricity wouldn't measure the faster than light motion of the strong force mostly either because like the electric charges, they wouldn't interact and just move at the speed of light or somewhat faster, at long range all the spins would add up to just the speed of light so relativity would hold up well at higher radii because the spin quantum numbers are much linked to the electric charge numbers).

-
So there is the longer range electromagnetic shell of the heavy particle, the strong force that would zoom right past the electric charges without a lot of interaction, but with enough from the much faster than light more dense strong force than electromagnetism to cause a somewhat faster than light speed of the outside charges found by Chin's experiments and explaining the fractional electric charges, and the strong force mostly would implode to the short range (strongest of all) weak force and this reacts back out under pressure to power atomic reactions. The good news for the atomic motor may be that while the strong force or electron beams of larger radius may not strongly mix with the electric charges more than this, the weak force (being much stronger, what else) would interact strongly, powering higher energy events than electricity. And unlike the Strong Force, the Weak Force has more friction by the equivalence of the electromagnetic and Weak force in the Electroweak theory. A beam like the electron beam in the atomic motor deeper in than the outer radius of the strong or electric field wouldn't be accelerated there at the lower energy than the weak force to much faster than light (because of inefficient interaction of the strong force with the probe). The equivalent change of wavelength of the electron or other type of beam (the change of wavelength is an inner change in the speed of the particle, itself faster than light because often it's already at the speed of light so any change in speed must reach it at faster than light to change it internally) even if the input power beam has a change of wavelength to collect the useful power still may not be nearly as much of a change as that of interaction with the Weak charge at lower radii. Thus while the atomic motor may not be of much worth just to collect power from the outer inertial field of electric charges or even the strong field (there may be some power here, but just to changes in wavelength corresponding to just somewhat faster than light) it may well be of worth to bevel the ray inward to the most powerful realm of the field, which would interact with the power ray more strongly, and this would be because the weak particle would be a contact charge and even spin at much faster than light than the strong force. The speed of light may be a limit on the general density of fields by my general use of Maxwell's idea that the speed of light was exactly found based on the idea of a resilient medium, changing the density would change the speed. By relativity the strong force and the (stronger) weak force with more density than the speed of light are not allowed, more spinning density, like an ice skaters arms, causes faster spin. Gravity being a much lower power field would perhaps be much faster than the strong force by linear F=ma, you spin faster with more density but might move faster in linear motion with density on S Beach.

PHYSICS SYNOPSES Faster Than Light? GWD May be The Answer. Physics Links ATOMIC MOTOR

...

Notarized by Ronnie Rollyson Website Manager
..

COPYRIGHT 2007-2009 by Charles Fredrick Lawson.

.....

What If The Reduction of Strong Centrifugal Force By Aligning The Poles of The Particles Is Still Insufficient To Achieve Fusion?

There is another possible option to achieve fusion with subatomic machines, the protons and neutrons would be in columns NS NS, one column of protons and one of neutrons held in the columns by the magnetic fields (the neutron has a short range field just as atoms with 0 electric charge have valence to hold with short range electric or magnetic fields) and in cones to tubes of protons or atoms of positive valence for stability. The opposite strong force of the poles with reduced centrifugal strong force and no electric repulsion of atoms would attract more than in usual fusion machines, each opposite strong force pole would implode by fusion without so much resistance as in other machines, and like a set of dominoes or fireworks, each implosion would pull in more of the opposite strong force protons and neutrons, making the reaction both self sustaining and exothermic. The problem of the radiation of too many neutrons common in other machines would be solved by more implosion of the field much like Lehner's Focus Fusion and the lower power needed to sustain the reaction, and the other problem of metal erosion of machines being caused by the radioactivity even with reduced nonthermal radiation may be solved both by the cones being without much surface area when they are are tubes and the cones at an angle, and the reaction would be far from the cones, just chains of the protons and neutrons being imploded, this may even be 10 feet from the cones because it would be powered by the strong implosion. There may be no other machine here than the implosion of the chains of the particles and the cones that move them in the general area so the reaction is caused mostly by the self sustaining process without much more than the cones ands the chains. Even so if this plan of just putting columns of NS NS protons an neutrons together in hopes of fusion by the implosion of the strong force (the Fusor Cone) doesn't work a more complex plan using pressure may be of worth;

You can exert force on the column of protons by just using electrons bound to the protons that then bind to other atoms like a lever with strong pressure because pressure is force per unit area, with the strong force of the small size of the column of protons they could exert more force to fuse than usual atomic fields with a good number of atoms pressing on the proton column to build up the pressure of the end proton to fuse with the neutron.
~~

The simple plan would be to actually just adhere atoms of negative valence on the inner electric field of the tube holding the protons by way of the electric field of the atom. With the nucleus well aligned with this proton ram of high inertia, coherence, and pressure, the fusion would be more probable. It seems easy to calculate if this would work. The known amount of density and force needed to cause fusion is known, and the improved probability of the fusion by alignment of the poles is with that much more force to overcome the known amount of centrifugal force. These are the only two general components; with the density per unit time known, it's easy to take the data about fusion machines like the Tokamac since a certain amount of reaction takes place (not enough to break even with the Tokamac) if almost all of this is caused by polar alignment. From the density needed and the alignment this is an easy way to see if this Plan for The Fusor Cone would be of worth with the improvement of polar alignment and reduced resistance to the electric and strong force to overcome the "centrifugal" resistance to the strong force and electromagnetic field of other machines.

..

A problem might seem to be about the cohesion of the strong force particles in the atom. If they were more with adhesion by the strong "magnetic" force of the NS NS of each proton and neutron and not so much because of the centrifugal force of each baryon, the poles would align and the atoms would fuse in common physics around us at STP. However the nucleus of atoms around us have centrifugal force and these machines like The Fusor Cone may have almost none, so the force needed to cause implosion and fusion may be much reduced.

Another possibility may be to ram the protons into an atom or chain of atoms that would hold the neutrons and use the magnetic field of the atoms to funnel in the protons with the inertia of the atoms holding the neutrons more stable. Atoms of low atomic mass would be used because heavier atoms would cause fission not fusion with the usual radioactivity of fission we hope to solve. This motif may be used with the cup to hold the atoms well, see below.

..

If the simple Fusor Cone is unviable because of e.g. alignment problems, or if the inertia of the nucleus of the target neutrons doesn't create enough resistance to the ram, a more complex way to achieve fusion might be tried;

...

THE WORLD CUP IN A TRIUMPHANT COMBINATION OF THE ONE... Neutrons have no electric charge except at short distances where the plus and minus that combine to make the 0 charge are in power, so you can't add electrons on to the neutrons to hold them in a cup of neutrons just by making the cup out of atoms alone. (Neutrons wouldn't just be linked to protons and then to electrons to hold neutrons as I say above, because with binding by the strong force the baryons would wrap around to a giant nucleus like U 238 and explode by radioactivity, thus to build larger big little structures out of the strong force other lower power methods would be used.) Unlike with the proton method above a neutron can't be held by the same type of anchor and tube. The best way to clamp neutrons and hold them strong if a simple Fusor Cone as above doesn't work may be to link neutron to neutrons in a cup shape by adhesion with the short range magnetic field of each neutron, then adhering the neutrons in the cup out to other neutrons in radiating spokes like a wagon wheel, add protons to the ends of the spokes and so on, and then add other electrons and atoms to the protons to anchor the cup so when the ram implodes it would have more force to cause the fusion. A way to hold the neutrons well may be to make a ring of neutrons held by the NS NS electric field of near radii of the neutrons all the way around the circle. Two or more of these circles bound into a tube with a neutron at the bottom of the tube would make the cup. This would give a solid cup for the proton column to press on the neutron in hopes of fusion by the combination of reduced centrifugal strong force, pressure from the column, and no external electric field of the atoms to overpower like in the Tokamac or other types of conventional fusion machines that have been more unviable cosmos in a jar.

The cup exerts pressure on the neutron or neutron column by way of the poles of the cup neutrons being like facing to the neutron so they wouldn't attract. The electric field of the neutrons being a combination of plus and minus charges is stable at short range.

Once the neutron or neutron column and the proton column were in the neutron cup and the proton tube, with the opposite strong force NS NS spins of the end protons and neutrons already aligned, the neutrons would be at rest in the cup and the proton column would be either moved by acceleration of the whole column by way of the proton column's electric field or slower pressure would be used like with a lever with large force per unit of area and when combined with the other advantages to fuse, or both pressure and speed in optimal amount would be used. The neutron with no electric charge would be best at rest because it wouldn't have an easy way to accelerate to smash into the protons so the neutron would be clamped in the cup in a column and the proton would add power to the more stationary neutron. This might then be self sustaining, the implosion of the strong force poles could pull in the protons and neutrons beside them in the columns with much force, causing more fusion, causing more implosion as the fuel of the protons and neutrons would be achieved with power. The metabolites would just be clean hydrogen like with the Tokamac, and it could be made by self assembling machines in any size from subatomic to more massive.

The main worth of the neutron cup or sphere may be to hold the neutrons in balance. Neutrons unlike a proton or proton wire having no electric charge would have less resistance to the collection ray like an electron beam so it might collect more power.

******

Notarized by Ronnie Rollyson Website Manager

COPYRIGHT 2007-2009 by Charles Fredrick Lawson.
~~