.. ....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.. ~~~~~~.

-