He has adopted a decidedly heterodox position, especially when he
demands non-coservation of baryon and lepton numbers. Electrons and
positrons forming singlet and triplet positronum as well as undergoing
direct annihalation is a simple experiment to observe. A molecule of
H-(anti-H) would be similarly liable to experimental observation.
Uncle Al's bet is on the Standard Model.

Quantum Mirror wrote:

I would like someone to comment on this preprint and absolute proof.
The author also claims that: These unprecedented results also remove
the so-called problem with matter-antimatter asymmetry in the Universe.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0508/0508043.pdf

If you follow the references he also claims to have found errors in the
CERN production of anti-H which would be unprecedented to find such an
error:

Flawing CERN antihydrogen-experiments with the available H-spectrum

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0502/0502074.pdf

From the preprint:

This is why, on the basis of the available line spectrum of natural
species hydrogen, CERN-approach must be flawed immediately. With
respect to spectral evidence and history, it appears that it is based
upon an inadequate if not erratic interpretation of available spectra
for both molecular and atomic hydrogen.

As far as history is concerned, poor communication between physicists
and chemists on the interpretation of available spectral data for
N-unit charge systems like atomic and molecular
hydrogen (the prototype chemical bond) is at the roots of unjust
working hypothesis, the basis of Maybe, working out the connection
between quarks and antiparticles, both needed to explain the chiral
behavior of bound stable composite particles, can lead to a highly
desirable common and more unifying solution

<http://arxiv.org/find/physics/1/au:+Hooydonk_G/0/1/0/all/0/1>

He has adopted a decidedly heterodox position, especially when he
demands non-coservation of baryon and lepton numbers. Electrons and
positrons forming singlet and triplet positronum as well as undergoing
direct annihalation is a simple experiment to observe. A molecule of
H-(anti-H) would be similarly liable to experimental observation.
Uncle Al's bet is on the Standard Model.

Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

Quantum Mirror wrote:

I would like someone to comment on this preprint and absolute proof.
The author also claims that: These unprecedented results also remove
the so-called problem with matter-antimatter asymmetry in the Universe.


http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0508/0508043.pdf


If you follow the references he also claims to have found errors in the
CERN production of anti-H which would be unprecedented to find such an
error:

Flawing CERN antihydrogen-experiments with the available H-spectrum


http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0502/0502074.pdf

From the preprint:

This is why, on the basis of the available line spectrum of natural
species hydrogen, CERN-approach must be flawed immediately. With
respect to spectral evidence and history, it appears that it is based
upon an inadequate if not erratic interpretation of available spectra
for both molecular and atomic hydrogen.

As far as history is concerned, poor communication between physicists
and chemists on the interpretation of available spectral data for
N-unit charge systems like atomic and molecular
hydrogen (the prototype chemical bond) is at the roots of unjust
working hypothesis, the basis of Maybe, working out the connection
between quarks and antiparticles, both needed to explain the chiral
behavior of bound stable composite particles, can lead to a highly
desirable common and more unifying solution

arxiv allows, even encourages, the posting of comments. Do a seach there with Hooydonk as
author and find the comments.

It is traditional in science to keep debate free of personal attacks. Some of the
postings in this thread ar appaling.

Quantum Mirror wrote:

I would like someone to comment on this preprint and absolute proof.
The author also claims that: These unprecedented results also remove
the so-called problem with matter-antimatter asymmetry in the Universe.


http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0508/0508043.pdf


If you follow the references he also claims to have found errors in the
CERN production of anti-H which would be unprecedented to find such an
error:

Flawing CERN antihydrogen-experiments with the available H-spectrum


http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0502/0502074.pdf

From the preprint:

This is why, on the basis of the available line spectrum of natural
species hydrogen, CERN-approach must be flawed immediately. With
respect to spectral evidence and history, it appears that it is based
upon an inadequate if not erratic interpretation of available spectra
for both molecular and atomic hydrogen.

As far as history is concerned, poor communication between physicists
and chemists on the interpretation of available spectral data for
N-unit charge systems like atomic and molecular
hydrogen (the prototype chemical bond) is at the roots of unjust
working hypothesis, the basis of Maybe, working out the connection
between quarks and antiparticles, both needed to explain the chiral
behavior of bound stable composite particles, can lead to a highly
desirable common and more unifying solution

arxiv allows, even encourages, the posting of comments. Do a seach there with Hooydonk as
author and find the comments.

It is traditional in science to keep debate free of personal attacks. Some of the
postings in this thread ar appaling.

Quantum Mirror wrote:
[Snip of which I know not]

hydrogen (the prototype chemical bond) is at the roots of unjust
working hypothesis, the basis of Maybe, working out the connection
between quarks and antiparticles, both needed to explain the chiral
behavior of bound stable composite particles, can lead to a highly
desirable common and more unifying solution

Any more to add in elaboration of the
phrase "chiral behavior"?

Do you mean something other than the
behavior of particles in a mag field
(as in a cloud chamber)?
From the paper: