Wolfhart Willimczik

A physical system in a metastable state remains as long as not a particular value of an arbitrary parameter is determined from outside. If you read this again you see there is no quantitative statement. This law said only why it happens. The interaction with the environment can be in different ways, but always giving the system the missing value of a free parameter. In my experiment the free parameter was the direction of the photon in space – the interaction a hit with another atom. Other ways are may a strong magnetic field (on the sun can be observed sudden bursts of particles and radiation in the preens of strong magnetic fields…) Any burst of energy is “suspicious” and may indicate the ending simultaneously of many metastable states, because there can be a chain reaction, if the ending of one generates the reason to end for another one. A delayed process is used by a laser. The direction in space seems to be the free parameter. All systems is given the same direction in space… We are in speculations. There is a wide field for new research for many years… One can even speculate that the big bang was the end of a large amount of metastable states. But we would still needed God, who put its finger on it, because we don’t know what ended it…. For water it is the exact location.... I think this is already understood. or? The dependency of radioactive decay from the distance to the sun has been – at least in one case – observed and confirmed by another measurement. Ask Google: under the subtle and mysterious influence of the sun. As of now there is no theoretical explanation for this strange effect buried in the decay rate data." http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V08NO2PDF/V08N2FAL.pdf “Dependencies of radioactive decay rates on various parameters such as temperature, pressure, electric and magnetic fields, and molecular structures were measured [e.g., 1, 2]….” That is exactly what my law says. “Evidence for Correlations between Nuclear Decay Rates and Earth-Sun Distance”, Jere H. Jenkins, Ephriam Fischbach, Hohn B. Buncher, John T. Gruenwald, Dennis Krause, and Joshua J. Mattes, arXiv preprint 0808.3283v1 [astro-ph], August 25, 2008. “Perturbation of Nuclear Decay Rates During the Solar Flare of 13 December 2006”, Jere H. Jenkins and Ephriam Fischbach, arXiv preprint 0808.3156 [astro-ph], August 22, 2008. http://phys.org/news202456660.html

then this case is closed for you and you can leave this threat. Thanks for your contributions.

Unfortunately there is no material on earth to stop neutrinos. They are going through the entire earth without stopping (hitting a nucleus). The earth is for them like glass for us. Otherwise it would be easy to make measurements at day and night - ergo behind the earth. In the night would be the decay lower. Changing the distance to the sun seems to be the best thing what we could do. A little bit is the earth itself doing it for us, but the best thing would be a probe to the edge of the solar system as we just had.

Ergo I was right with my prediction of rule No 1 he is always right. How many posts must a user do that he is always right? 1000, 2000 or what number? How many posts must a user do to get the title "Platzhirsch" Wolfhart Willimczik said Why can no admin administer the rules publicly as the police is doing this? They are afraid, but of what? Since the begin of civilizations “rules” are misused by people above us to suppress everybody who is different. One of the first physicist, Giordano Bruno, was burned alive, because he violated the rule “we are the middle of everything…” Galileo was forced to deny his findings. A unknown number of scientists is murdered, put in jails, in madhouses and their voices are silent. The man who hides behind Sean Connery with the pistol said: “Nobody here is jailed, burned alive or forced to recant under threat of death or even house arrest.” The man with the pistol will only fire at him with senseless objections until he turns away in horror. Then he will jail his entire work- or what? Wolfhart Willimczik, on 16 Apr 2013 - 19:00, said: The only hope for all suppressed scientist ( at least 100 000) is today a science forum to save their work for future generations. But what happens their? You can observe it live in every forum. First Admins beat the living daylight out of them and ban them on the end. We log our bans publicly, and give an accounting of the rules violations that lead to them ..and the rule No 1 is: the man with the pistol is always right… Wolfhart Willimczik, on 16 Apr 2013 - 19:00, said: On the admin with the pistol: Yes - Science is not democracy, but a forum society (how people treat each other) could be – should be. If that's what you desire, you are free to go set up your own forum. A wink with the pistol to go? Wolfhart Willimczik, on 16 Apr 2013 - 19:00, said: Oh God I have never seen such pessimistic man. Now I understand why he can live only with a pistol in his hand. He has absolutely no idea how discoveries are done. He has no knowledge how many discoveries and invention came from “happy coincidences”. We had not even insulin if there had been not a happy coincidence etc etc I'm not talking of accidental, lucky discoveries. I'm talking about incorrect models that get a few answers right. This is a typical contradiction in terms you are working with as I already noticed. A physicist know every model, every law has boundaries. If a model gets “a few answers right” than lets them do it. Only the boundaries must be set. This would be an appropriate approach not what you are doing! Wolfhart Willimczik, on 16 Apr 2013 - 19:00, said: He should read. But if he don’t and hate physicists like Einstein he is a hopeless case. I don't know how you got the impression that I don't read or that I hate Einstein. By your statement regarding Einstein. You made numerous objections against me and it turned out you have not even read my article - nor understood anything. Now you say you wont never understand a new idea – only attack it. One strange fellow above even liked it. You should go together. Wolfhart Willimczik, on 16 Apr 2013 - 19:00, said: What is “demonstrably wrong” – obviously if he said so. Demonstrably wrong: an experimental result that disagrees with the predictions of a model. And in your view - what is wrong, the model or the experiment? Wolfhart Willimczik, on 16 Apr 2013 - 19:00, said: What time will be wasted – his? If it's my idea, yes. I would like see your idea if you had ever one. I have already 99 objections loaded…I Wolfhart Willimczik, on 16 Apr 2013 - 19:00, said: But this man with the pistol is not alone. At the institute for experimental nuclear physics 1966 we had counters that heavy I could not lift one alone, but we could also set it as a clock – counting seconds. I was always seeing in the future (the transistor was coming) and said: we could build digital clocks for everybody. I was immediately ridiculed, because “scientists like the man with the pistol” proved me immediately wrong and hit me like a lightning – beat the living daylight out of me. Nobody spoke with me anymore and had to leave the institute. Today – of course – know everybody that it has been only “a waste of time” to try manufacture digital clocks – as the man with the pistol and his colleges always stated. In this forum the man with the pistol acts like a policeman shooting down any new idea he sees. On the end he kills not only ideas - he kills your future! You can only kill an idea if you can demonstrate it's wrong. “Demonstrate” – not proven? You demonstrate a pistol – is this it? Hier wendet sich der Gast mit Grausen This turns the guest with horror Do you see the disadvantage a have? I am in the bright light and show my face – you on the other hand are in the dark and you have a pistol in your hand or you use even another person to intimidate your victims…

You are right we can expect neutrinos everywhere - therefore everywhere radioactive decay, - if my theory is right. (I was a little sloppy, because I wished the man behind Sean Connery as far away as possible...) We can only use changes in the density of the neutrino flow. On earth we had to build a strong neutrino source - (not only for a short time like a bomb), what would be a challenge.

identity theft because you post with your real name? Never heart of this. This may happen if you answer a false E-mail with your bank account etc. I want only what I give by myself - a real name. Pictures are not necessary, but don't put a picture of another person up. What would Sean Connery say to this? The man who hides behind him must have ask him. Otherwise it can’t be allowable. At least it shows a certain bad taste by this user. He wants intimitate his victims. This are all excuses for something else, what nobody wants reveal. i show you that your own words show no consistancy. That’s all nothing compared what the SSD & KGB can do with you via anonymous Zersetzung (there is not even an English word for it. It is the most modern torture with scientific methods, special developed for the internet from the communists). And this is the naked, ugly reality.

It has something to do with the environment the system is in, not only with the specific state. Start with putting your system in space without any outside influence and see what happens. I expect nothing for a long time. (In space are the longest times observed.) Then do something to your metastable system (anything - even shooting with a pistol) and you will see by what things you end the metastable system. Tell the result. The Russians bring you to the space station. For testing radioactive decay by neutrinos you must leave the sun system until there are no more neutrinos. Good flight

No, but you hide under the table - and of what are you afraid of? Do you believe that from tomorrow on everybody is showing this real face and name like me and the few cordially decent people there?

Since when is this Sean Connery? I see only a man with a pistol. Why will somebody put a false picture up? And why is not everybody using this right name? Then all the problems would be gone in an instant. He will never dare to do what he is doing right now. He show his face and I show respect. Tell me please, if this is his real name I will use it, otherwise it make no sence. With his inappropriate objections and non-understanding he can’t earn any respect from me. Otherwise this could be a wild computer I am talking to. This is the same as showing respect to a hat on a stick as it has happened in Switzerland (Kessler). On the other hand, if it is really Sean Connery – respect! What is going on there? You let me talk to a computer and everybody is laughing? Then I understand at least why he is repeating always the same wrong things without any change.

I have never seen any wisdom from the man with the pistol - only beating. He has no respect for other human beings, what would notice every kid. Every kid learns whether somebody wants help like this professor, who had shown his face, or whether somebody shoots with a pistol at you from the dark - without never showing his face.

Younger people should listen to the wisdom of decent older ones. The world will be a better place.

yes. Why can no admin administer the rules publicly as the police is doing this? They are afraid, but of what? Since the begin of civilizations “rules” are misused by people above us to suppress everybody who is different. One of the first physicist, Giordano Bruno, was burned alive, because he violated the rule “we are the middle of everything…” Galileo was forced to deny his findings. A unknown number of scientists is murdered, put in jails, in madhouses and their voices are silent. If not that much (mostly by wars) people with knowledge had been silenced we would today certainly at least 1000 years further. (The millions of casualties of the great plague in the middle age in Europe could be avoided etc) Communists killed systematically scientists, suppressed their ideas (except the military ones). Did you know that the SSD in East-Germany was – and is still today out there to silent scientists? I was jailed after I showed an invention in TV! My college was put in a madhouse after he wrote a unique work about magnetic fields on the sun, what is not understood. Others had gotten a Nobel price. He was “treated” in a madhouse until he forgot everything and lost his mind. And look around how much knowledge is today destroyed – even in the internet by people above us - Admins. I have not to look far. I could easily write in English, if the only useable translation program “witchpen”, created by a physicist in Switzerland, would not had disappeared again. (My old one works with windows 3.5 only). There is not a single institution against the loss of knowledge on earth! (Hopefully Google will do it. We have today such great storage that everybody on earth could write something what could be saved for 1000 years. ) ...... The only hope for all suppressed scientist ( at least 100 000) is today a science forum to save their work for future generations. But what happens their? You can observe it live in every forum. First Admins beat the living daylight out of them and ban them on the end. The solution would be very simple. I work since 50 years in this way. It has the structure of a pyramid. One topic: every idea – no exceptions – is put in the lowest level of the pyramid. The ones which get no response stay there. Others move up. All users let the best ones one level higher und so forth. On top is mostly only one idea, which I then patented. There are no names like speculations, trash etc and no trouble. The entire community – not single Admins – moves something up or down. Everybody starts – for instance – in the second level. Then it will not happen that 2 rats talking to each other over the Atlantic is found under “science” On the admin with the pistol: Yes - Science is not democracy, but a forum society (how people treat each other) could be – should be. How – I spoke Oh God I have never seen such pessimistic man. Now I understand why he can live only with a pistol in his hand. He has absolutely no idea how discoveries are done. He has no knowledge how many discoveries and invention came from “happy coincidences”. We had not even insulin if there had been not a happy coincidence etc etc He should read. But if he don’t and hate physicists like Einstein he is a hopeless case. What is “demonstrably wrong” – obviously if he said so. What time will be wasted – his? But this man with the pistol is not alone. At the institute for experimental nuclear physics 1966 we had counters that heavy I could not lift one alone, but we could also set it as a clock – counting seconds. I was always seeing in the future (the transistor was coming) and said: we could build digital clocks for everybody. I was immediately ridiculed, because “scientists like the man with the pistol” proved me immediately wrong and hit me like a lightning – beat the living daylight out of me. Nobody spoke with me anymore and had to leave the institute. Today – of course – know everybody that it has been only “a waste of time” to try manufacture digital clocks – as the man with the pistol and his colleges always stated. In this forum the man with the pistol acts like a policeman shooting down any new idea he sees. On the end he kills not only ideas - he kills your future!

That's right - you can't know what I have not yet explained. Unfortunately, you have not understood (or you are not willing to) what I have explained - which is the problem with you. Stay on the simpler cases which I described. There is no external effect that causes the 2S state to require more time, but only to end it. (It shows again that you have nothing understood) You have to start there: A physical system in a metastable state remains as long as not a particular value of an arbitrary parameter is determined from outside.

Ein physikalisches System verharrt solange in einem metastabilen Zustand solange nicht ein bestimmter Wert eines frei wählbaren Parameters von außen vorgegeben wird. Google. A physical system in a metastable state remains as long as not a particular value of an arbitrary parameter is determined from outside. oops

1. This is basic physics. You should know it. I find no definition of metastable states with “angular momentum”. (You should post it, if you have one.) But to satisfy your love in angular momentum there is your answer: The 2S1/2 state of atomic hydrogen is usually metastable, consequently, the lifetime is increased to an estimated value of 0.15 s. The necessity for angular momentum and parity conservation forces the second excited state (2S1/2) of atomic hydrogen to decay by simultaneous emission of two photons. Ergo – it changes nothing, except there are 2 photons instead of 1. Ergo - your objection has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. q.e.d.

Finally you grasp there are no " spontaneous transitions" causality is there again. If you mean with "induced" or "help from the outside" what I said (giving a specific value of a free parameter) - you have something right There are different definitions for a metastable state, what is a sign that the right definition is still missing. 1. Metallurgy: chemically unstable in the absence of certain conditions that would induce stability, but not liable to spontaneous transformation. 2. Physics, Chemistry . pertaining to a body or system existing at an energy level (metastable state) above that of a more stable state and requiring the addition of a small amount of energy to induce a transition to the more stable state. a). (of a body or system) having a state of apparent equilibrium although capable of changing to a more stable state b). (of an atom, molecule, ion, or atomic nucleus) existing in an excited state with a relatively long lifetime Metallurgy . “absence of certain conditions” comes close to my definition, whereby I only explain the “certain conditions”. Physics, Chemistry “…requiring the addition of a small amount of energy to induce a transition to the more stable state.” Giving an information requires always a small amount of energy. Forgetting the information would mean I send only a small amount of energy to this forum, because letters coming from Florida to you requires a small amount of energy. Secondly a metastable state has too much energy. Why should an atom in an exited state with too much energy need more energy to get out of it? 1. “apparent equilibrium” seems to be only another word for metastable state. 2. that is right; a metastable state has a relatively long lifetime. ergo: There are no basic contradictions between the old definitions and my new one.

My peace proposal to you: We should go from easy cases to the most complicated, putting angular momentum on the end. I have to find who made the experiments etc What is “OMG”? Finally you got it. Metastable states are not only in QM! A physicist is always looking for the law applicable in a wider field. Nevertheless I made also a prediction for radioactive decay. The main suspect for “the outside help” is the neutrino from the sun. I am proud that latest observations indicate exactly this. Since you are there on the forefront of physics you followed this very closely. Remember there is only one way to test a new theory: this are experiments and observations! Objections are everywhere – even against Einstein, in spite of experiments and observations proved what he said. Now (or in 50 years, if the debate ended) we have to admit that he was right to say: “God doesn’t play dice.”

Then please copy at least the right passage - why metastable states exist - what the missing angular momentum provided etc. Until now you have no answer provided. Objections are only valid if at least my article has been read, what is obviously not the case. I say again: show it. If you can't do it I will do it by myself. What have selection rules to do with the topic? I am the one who generated the first time traces from a single alpha particle. If you thing this could be done only by a non-physicist your opinion would shed a dim light on "real physicists." (I though we dropped personnel attacks?) If you would read my article you would find several samples where I pointed out the free parameter: 5.1 Water: Cocking clean water in a clean container in labs lead sometimes to an metastable state, that overheated water will not boil, because any point on the bottom has the same chance to create the first steam bubble. There is no singularity. This is a free choose able parameter for the first bubble. Chemist solve this problem simply by putting a small stone on the bottom. Now exist a singularity - a point on the bottom, what distinguishes itself from all other spots. An explosive boiling is prevented. It seems also the more the normal boiling is delayed the more explosive is the ending of the metastable state. The more extended the delay the higher the difference in the temperature over the normal boiling point of water, the more urgency exists for ending the metastable state and the smaller differences in the parameters may trigger the delayed process. The greater the delay, the more energy is suddenly released, the greater the water explosion, but In the laser technique this effect is desirable. On the other end very clean water can also exist below the freezing temperature, what is also a metastable state. The free parameter is the location, where the first crystal will occur. Throwing in a small stone defines a certain value of the free parameter and the crystallization begins and goes fast. Normally are there impurities which do the same. 5.1.2. Condensation: If the humidity in clear air gets over a certain point (dew point) it should condensate as water or fog, but some times nothing happens. A high flying airplane starts the process of condensation with particles in the exhaust and we see the well known stripes in the sky. The free parameter of a metastable state was the exact location of condensation, where the water droplet shell be created. Every particle defines such a point. Every droplet has a particle in it. etc Please read my article Everybody can read the entire article at: http://science-technology-inventions.weebly.com/ I used Groot and Penning. You will not be familiar with this, but you must not know everything.

I did not investigated angular momentum within metastable states. You are free to establish your own theory, but remember the rules there in “speculations” – you have to prove it. You have to make experiments – like me – to show what will provide the missing angular momentum to end the metastable state. Everybody has an objection. This is not a creative move. Ergo you have to admit I am the first physicist offering an explanation why metastable states exist. A small step in the right direction. I explained that there are in any case another free choosable parameter. Please read my entire article.

..and why are there "no allowed first-order transitions" ? This definition explains not why are there metastable states! That is the point - everything else you mention is something else. I have found an explanation why metastable states exist – who else? You could actually use my definition - test it.

I was already thinking on radioactive decay. Observations indicate that my theory is right also for this, but it is right for boiling water also. More rapidly means the information from the outside is coming faster in. There are many ways - for instance a higher pressure and temperature in a gas. I could measure a dependency from the pressure. You suggested an electromagnetic field. In space are the times longest, because a single atom is very alone. What is "Paschen notation"? I made my research 1966 - Mr. Paschen was obviously later - or? You may investigate the angular momentum. My theory opens up an entire field of new research. You have not yet presented your definition of metastable states that other physicist can compare it side by side. Otherwise we get lost in details.

I have not investigated H 2S. You may see on my page 20 what I what states I investigated N, Ne, and Ar – not H. As you should know there are allow able states and not allow able states in any atom. If any electron stays in a non- allow able state it was called a “metastable state”, but nobody had any explanation, why it stays such a long time in a forbidden state. Can my student follow that far? The user John Cuthber is ignored do to sabotaging this forum

An exited electron moves to a lower level of energy by emitting a photon is basic physics. Moving electrons generate electromagnetic waves - ergo also photons. You may argue the photon causes the transition or the transition causes the photon… I let it to you what you prefer: first the egg or first the hen. (Why must I teach you the basics of nuclear physics?)

it is the direction in space of the photon. I said it already - you should read my beginning posting.

I was going to post a simple idea why gravity is also a pushing force based on Einstein’s model. (It is actually there included, but nobody seems to see it.) But as long such users as John Cuthber is allowed to destroy any discussion I will not do it in this forum. (Ich werfe keine Perlen vor die Säue.) His “profound scientific arguments” are “You are wrong because you are wrong” (above no 62) or “But the point is that, while you ignore basic physics, your posts will not mean anything and will be written off as mumbo jumbo. (By which I mean very obscure and not meaningful or not true).” Killing a discussion about a theory which is already proven by experiments and observations! (His comrade from germany react only 1.5 hours later by stopping the discussion!) It is never a harm if somebody post some wrong ideas. Real scientists know a prove that something is wrong or impossible is also precious knowledge! But John Cuthuber destroys everything. He can not longer tolerated in this forum. First somebody has to clean up this forum or science is lost in this forum. Greetings from Florida (but no greetings to germany)