Yeah yeah, but there's a danger even in that. The very fact that we are making suggestions about the possible danger of hydrinos shows (to some cursory readers) that we accept the existence of these makey-uppie things. Rather than discussing the environmental impact of this stuff, we should be saying "it doesn't exist".
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Brilliant Light Power Going To Market - Free Energy Generator
- Thread starter michaelsuede
- Start date
- Status
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
BUT if somebody pretend santa is real, and want to sell santa share, I think the environmental / air traffic impact is a way to put them in place.
"what you have is real ? I am game. Show me the environmental study by the EPA. You ahve none ? huho I think it is time to bring environmental study specialist to see how bad you polluted ... And the long term effect of Hydrino...".
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2012
- Messages
- 10,259
I know, but if you search for potential environmental impacts of hydrino waste release on google it nowcomes here
Well then, we'd best make sure the information we provide is straightforward and accurate.
aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
He's a man with a plan!
But Mills is a first level strategist.
Remember Banything Light Power is not looking for investors, but this is displayed in their website's main page:
Surely michael will get back to them ASAP.
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
Development of working device was never his plan. Where is profit in that ? It costs money in first place. And only thing it can demonstrate is it does not work.
Making cheap cool looking gizmo clearly seems to to repay itself though.
We don't have to wait till he produces result in 2017 .. he claimed he will produce results years ago.
Making cheap cool looking gizmo clearly seems to to repay itself though.
We don't have to wait till he produces result in 2017 .. he claimed he will produce results years ago.
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2012
- Messages
- 10,259
Interesting. BLP wants "a detailed background on yourself as well as your team" before they'll say anything else. Why do they need my resume before telling me if they even make Hydrino gas available for testing?
Last edited:
aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
Sounds reasonable, scam or not.
They have asked me the same when I'm looking for access to climate data.
They have asked me the same when I'm looking for access to climate data.
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
Industrial espionage?
Nan. Did the same in the past. It is just filtering simply non serious demand to reduce workload : asking for such data will wed off a lot of people. I would be more suspicious if they did not filter anybody.
aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
«The problem with our hydrinos is that they rob energy from whatever source they can and become normal hydrogen again. Besides, look what happened to the last guy who took some of them for further research»
https://youtu.be/0APF3SO9tqE?t=195
https://youtu.be/0APF3SO9tqE?t=195
I'm not so sure. Energy profits are enticing to investors. Unresolved environmental issues (such as potential hydrino gas toxicity) are off-putting to those same investors. For good reasons: they can tie up projects and the capital invested in them for indefinite amounts of time.
Besides, I've already given them their next stage, a few pages back: the hydrogen-hydrino UV laser.
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
Production of the laser has been delayed while a vendor works on developing the shark's head mounting device.
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
I read Mills book with his idiocy of trying to throw away quantum mechanics for purely classical physics. The delusions really start with abysmally ignorant criticism of the Schrödinger equation on page 15.
The hundreds of pages in the rest of the book can be ignored since page 17 starts with a classic bound electron. This is denying the basic physics that a bound electron is accelerating and that an accelerating charge emits radiation. Thus a classic bound electron spirals into the nucleus in a short time. Mills states the Haus condition (nonradiation condition) correctly - it is the condition for an ensemble of charges not to emit radiation. But this section is "ONE-ELECTRON ATOMS".
Page 19. Figure I.1 is the delusion that a bound electron is "a constant two-dimensional spherical surface...". A delusion of electron spin following "Larmor excitation in a magnetic field". A point from the Stern-Gerlach experiment is that electron spin is an intrinsic property not depending on any magnetic field.
Delusions also abound about cosmology and nuclear physics, e.g. page 1509 has the imaginary hydrinos being dark matter - denying the observations that dark matter is dark! The electron neutrino is a "special kind of photon" but the evidence is that neutrinos have mass.
- Math has to be done to obtain the Rydberg formula!
- Not being relativistic.
Of course a equation not including relativity is not relativistic
!
It was Dirac that included relativity to produce Dirac's equation. - Violates Maxwell's equations.
The Schrodinger equation is a quantum version of Newton's laws, not electromagnetism. - A lie about "each of the functions that corresponds to a highly excited state electron is not integrable and cannot be normalized".
- Normalization of the wave function is basic undergraduate QM.
- Thinks it has to predict the electron magnetic moment.
- Ignorant about the Dirac equation which describes electron spin.
- Ignorant about quantum electrodynamics which does predict the electron magnetic moment.
- A strawman argument that it is not a wave function (it is a diffusion equation).
- A lie that it does not conserve energy "in an inverse potential field".
Schrödinger equation is consistent with conservation of energy in all situations. - A delusion that allowing an electron to exist in the nucleus is "physically nonsensical".
This explains capture of electrons by the nucleus! - QM does explain phenomena such as scattering of electrons from hydrogen using point particles.
- A lie about the Schrödinger equation producing infinite magnetic and electric energy for elections.
Based on his ignorance of what quantum spin is - an intrinsic property. - An abysmally ignorant lie of a "proposed" QED and idiotic "postulated" parts of quantum field theory, e.g. Feynman diagrams.
Quantum electrodynamics exists and is one of the most precisely tested theories in physics.
The hundreds of pages in the rest of the book can be ignored since page 17 starts with a classic bound electron. This is denying the basic physics that a bound electron is accelerating and that an accelerating charge emits radiation. Thus a classic bound electron spirals into the nucleus in a short time. Mills states the Haus condition (nonradiation condition) correctly - it is the condition for an ensemble of charges not to emit radiation. But this section is "ONE-ELECTRON ATOMS".
Page 19. Figure I.1 is the delusion that a bound electron is "a constant two-dimensional spherical surface...". A delusion of electron spin following "Larmor excitation in a magnetic field". A point from the Stern-Gerlach experiment is that electron spin is an intrinsic property not depending on any magnetic field.
Delusions also abound about cosmology and nuclear physics, e.g. page 1509 has the imaginary hydrinos being dark matter - denying the observations that dark matter is dark! The electron neutrino is a "special kind of photon" but the evidence is that neutrinos have mass.
Last edited:
PeterWol62
New Blood
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2017
- Messages
- 14
There are people here who post arguments against claims which were never made. For example, Giordano wrote - "Yet we are supposed to believe that BLP has had this incredibly cheap, effective, no-maintenance method of generating heat and electricity for years and years, yet they have not released it because they need to "optimize" it even further."
In fact Mills worked out, over 20 years ago, that the hydrino should exist and that it might be possible to extract energy. In theory. Then, he got to work, and met all sorts of difficulties. The first proposal failed because regeneration seemed impossible. The second idea, the CIHT cell, seemed promising, and Mills and colleagues were very excited about it, but it proved impossible to scale up to more than a fraction of a watt. Recently, the idea of heavy currents in a suitable plasma environment seems to be working out, despite quite a few problems, and there is reason to hope for a really useful product by the end of this year. Mills has not had a working electric generator for over 20 years! He might have one soon, although I worry about handling the huge heat.
And by the way, I totally support every word posted here by MichaelSuede.
But you probably guessed that.
Life is too short to comment on the posts from Reality Check, but I want to at least assert that Mills' concept of the single electron is that it is not a point but a sphere, wrapped around the nucleus, and because its rotating charge is evenly spread, it does not radiate energy. Bohr should have not chosen to believe that the electron, for some mysterious reason, does not obey Maxwell's equations, but rather that there must be something wrong with viewing an electron as a tiny thing orbiting around the nucleus.
Peter W.
In fact Mills worked out, over 20 years ago, that the hydrino should exist and that it might be possible to extract energy. In theory. Then, he got to work, and met all sorts of difficulties. The first proposal failed because regeneration seemed impossible. The second idea, the CIHT cell, seemed promising, and Mills and colleagues were very excited about it, but it proved impossible to scale up to more than a fraction of a watt. Recently, the idea of heavy currents in a suitable plasma environment seems to be working out, despite quite a few problems, and there is reason to hope for a really useful product by the end of this year. Mills has not had a working electric generator for over 20 years! He might have one soon, although I worry about handling the huge heat.
And by the way, I totally support every word posted here by MichaelSuede.
But you probably guessed that.
Life is too short to comment on the posts from Reality Check, but I want to at least assert that Mills' concept of the single electron is that it is not a point but a sphere, wrapped around the nucleus, and because its rotating charge is evenly spread, it does not radiate energy. Bohr should have not chosen to believe that the electron, for some mysterious reason, does not obey Maxwell's equations, but rather that there must be something wrong with viewing an electron as a tiny thing orbiting around the nucleus.
Peter W.
Last edited:
phunk
Illuminator
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,127
Yeah, that was figured out almost 100 years ago.
aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
Yes, like any time a mirage is involved, water is always just a few miles away.
We know that, as the economic equation of BLP is based on "the present value of hope", the least BLP can provide is articulate posts in forums and blogs and some intriguing youtube videos and press "what ifs". It's nice to know the company is now trying to meet that standard.
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
A "single electron" doesn't have a nucleus. If you mean an atom with a single electron, then say that. So what exactly is "Mills' concept of the single electron" (that means just the electron itself)? Is it a point particle or not?
The Bohr model, seriously? Sure you or Mills wouldn't like to oppose a more outdated model?
Try "electron cloud" for something closer to this century and particularly if you wish to address actual quantum mechanics.
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_cloud
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital
ETA:
Oh, and welcome to the forum.
Last edited:
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
Yep, when you posted this it was obvious that you are down the same rabbit hole as MS.
In fact Mills has promised a production model several times in the past 20 years. There are posts in this thread that quote him doing so. With that history, people here are understandably skeptical that this recent promise will be adhered to. How about you? Are you fully confident, as is MS, that a production model will be available for sale or lease, by this time next year?
You mean for instance the electron cloud concept developed in 1926 by Erwin Schrödinger and Werner Heisenberg a decade after Bohr's model?
Last edited:
- Status