On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:25:50 -0800 (PST), Art Unwin
wrote:

While I am at it the particle that I refer to may well not be a
neutrinos

It is not like a neutrino ...but:
but it does seem to fit.

A massless, chargeless particle works for enhancing RF radiation?

Neutrons and all the other chemical particles
that I have negligently brought into the subject
do not have a place in my theory with respect to radiation

That pretty much tosses out the baby with the bathwater.

just a particle which I feel inclined to call a Neutrinos

So, you now claim to have invented/discovered an unknown particle that
you are going to name a Neutrinos? (Convention would probably bristle
at adding just an s makes it respectable science.) Is this a
creationist particle?

Why not call it an Artrino or Unwintron? How did you discover it?
What did you use as a detector? Were you listening to 160M when it
came on with a signature tune like Big Ben and the BBC?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Quantum foam = Aether. End of discussion.


Ed, NM2K (for a bit longer)