Brilliant Light Power Going To Market - Free Energy Generator

[JeanTate]

Why dihidrino. Why not quadrino. After all, the bond must not represent the "classical" QM bond.

Once you start down, why not go even deeper.

That's something that's been puzzling me, pretty much from the beginning.

Mills proposes a revolution in physics, which would up-end most of chemistry too. Yet he seems unbelievably conservative when it comes to exploring the implications! Only one (two?) fractional quantum states (why not a googolplex of them?) Only one element with such states; only textbook chemical bonds;
only atoms (by not protons?); ...

 

[abaddon]

And here I thought that Mills had indeed published experiments that showed such spectra...

Like Steorn Oh, wait.

 

[Reality Check]

He didn't like the interpretation of QM. Hence his Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment to show its absurdity. His charge density was turned into probabilty, with the attendant unphysical aspects, and he regretted that.

Just to be clear - that post misrepresents Schrödinger and QM.
Schrödinger's cat was a discussion point. The paradox in it is what encouraged other interpretations which remove the "absurdity" of a cat that is both alive and dead. There is a disputed experiment suggesting that any detector including the one with the cat collapses the wave function, i.e. the cat is dead or alive but not both.

Schrödinger's charge density interpretation was abandoned by Schrödinger because it did not work.

Schrödinger's charge density interpretation was not "turned into" the Copenhagen or other interpretation.

Schrödinger's opinion is not relevant. His equation works in the appropriate cases. The Dirac equation is the appropriate equation for electrons.

 

[Reality Check]

Of course not to the first two. For the third,....

Thus:
Mills was deluded when he treated a bound alpha particle as a free electron because they are not the same as you know.
Mills was deluded when he treated a free electron as a photon because they are not the same as you know.

Read question 3 which I will make more explicit:
markie: How big is an atom measured from the nucleus to the surrounding electrons (even Mills "orbitsphere" delusion) when there are no electrons attached to the atom?
Or:
markie: What is the atomic radius of a single proton?
markie: What is the atomic radius of a single neutron?
markie: What is the atomic radius of a single alpha particle?

 

[jsfisher]

Like Steorn Oh, wait.

No, Steorn at least had the decency to throw in the towel after 17 years.

 

[Reality Check]

A free electron Mills depicts....

More Mills delusions are irrelevant.

It is his delusion that an electron is the size of an atom when the radius of an electron is measured to be less than a proton.
It is his statement about angular momentum that you remain ignorant about.

 

[Reality Check]

I didn't look it up but trust you quoted correctly.

So what does your extensive knowledge of science p) that must have convinced you that Mills is right tell you about the quote? For example: What is the mass of a photon, a neutron and an electron neutrino?

To anyone who can read Wikipedia: "The electron neutrino causes neutron production from a photon" is a delusion.

 

[Reality Check]

He has written a huge tome ....

A tome full of ignorance and fantasies does not impress anyone, markie, even if more ignorance and fantasies are added to it.

Volume and persistence is fairly common among physics cranks. An example is the artist Miles Mathis (6,066 pp. total. 8/16/2015). They are ignorant of a good guideline for scientific research. If you have an idea, first gather evidence for it before wasting time erecting an edifice on top of foundations that may be blown away.

 

[Reality Check]

Rathke's paper is ancient, and Mills responded to his criticisms a long time ago.

http://www.millsian.com/papers/Rathke'sresp012108Web.pdf

Found this post and the Mills PDF is another source of ignorance and delusion!
On the first page he disses the Schrödinger equation as "a purely mathematical model of the electron" but his "model" is also purely mathematical eek:!
Mills seems ignorant about the Schrödinger equation again. The condition that the wave function goes to zero as radial distance increases is a statement the quantum system is local.
Mills lies about his model being based on experimental observation, e.g. no observations that measure the properties of his orbitsphere.

The PDF is a long 165-odd jaw-dropp) page regurgitation of his mathematics (see above!) that almost ignores Rathke's paper. A few unsupported assertions and that is all.

 

[Pixel42]

Like I said, I'm not affiliated, I'm a casual observer from the peanut gallery for about 18 years now.

How many more years with nothing of commercial value produced would it take before you started to seriously consider the possibility that it's a scam?

 

[Dave Rogers]

A filament you say. The tungsten plates were pretty substantial.

So you don't dispute that this device involves shoring two massive supercapacitors through a pair of tungsten plates. Good. I would expect that to vapourise the tungsten, at least locally, by sparking between raised irregularities in the surface - they're there, at the very least on the atomic monolayer scale, even if you can't see them - and to produce enough of an electrical discharge to make a big flash of light and chuck out some UV, wouldn't you?

This is fairground level scamming.

Dave

 

[Aepervius]

As one who is reading (and wildly misrepresenting btw) Mills GUTCP, you'll eventually come across Mill's fine work on the Fine Structure and the Lamb Shift.

Did you not say you were a biochemist or biologist ?

How do you evaluate it is a fine work ? I would be hard pressed with my QM background to evaluate if a biochemist work is good or bad, barring alarm signals on the paper structure, so basic science.

 

[Aepervius]

He didn't like the interpretation of QM. Hence his Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment to show its absurdity. His charge density was turned into probabilty, with the attendant unphysical aspects, and he regretted that. Not his equation, per se. Just to be clear.

No he did not like the Copenhagen interpretation of the measurement. That is why he made the infamous cat experiment to show the absurdity of the interpretation. That is what the 3rd or 4th time we tell you ?

This is way way different to disliking his own equation: your first statement.

 

[Aepervius]

No, Steorn at least had the decency to throw in the towel after 17 years.

No decency at play. They did not get more money. They were up to the end trying to push their red monkey face "infinite charger" and lies (AFAIK they sold none, because most probably a lawyer told them if they sold one and it was shown to be a fraud they would be on the hook, but if they pretended only it works, to get more money from investor they would be fine, IMO).

 

[halleyscomet]

You have it so wrong it's not even funny. Just saying.

Psst: This is a skeptics' forum. Insults without specifics to back them up are kinda like spritzing water on a duck's back. We're used to it as the result of all the woo-woo nutters and quacks who come here to get served.

Unless you want to be lumped in with those idiots, you need to bring your "A" game and explain what, specifically, someone supposedly got wrong. Your "LOLZ! NOPES!" replies are singularly impotent here.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

So you don't dispute that this device involves shoring two massive supercapacitors through a pair of tungsten plates. Good. I would expect that to vapourise the tungsten, at least locally, by sparking between raised irregularities in the surface - they're there, at the very least on the atomic monolayer scale, even if you can't see them - and to produce enough of an electrical discharge to make a big flash of light and chuck out some UV, wouldn't you?

This is fairground level scamming.

Dave

I wondered why the capacitors were described as 2.85V, which is both oddly specific and not the obvious property by which one selects capacitors. I hadn't appreciated they were exotic supercapacitors.

The spec sheet http://www.maxwell.com/images/documents/K2_2_85V_DS_3000619EN_3_.pdf suggests a charged pair of these could sustain around 400 amps for about a minute (wasn't there a reference to taking about as much power as a hairdryer - that seems to be in the right ballpark).

 

[Darat]

No wonder these types of scams go on for so long when we all get drawn into pointless discussions which really are not any different from discussing whether Superman can survive an nuclear blast.

Nuclear blasts exist, superman doesn't!

It might be quite entertaining and fun to discuss Mills theories but it matters not one whit whether his maths is right or wrong, the only discussion should be a question, "Do his generators work?"

He has claimed over decades that his generators work, he has claimed to have working models for decades, yet still cannot provide any that is the answer i.e. "no."

And by the way the idea that he is getting more energy out then he puts in is according to his own video not true, they have not yet been able to stop using external power to ..er.... power the "reaction!"

 

[halleyscomet]

No wonder these types of scams go on for so long when we all get drawn into pointless discussions which really are not any different from discussing whether Superman can survive an nuclear blast.

Nuclear blasts exist, superman doesn't!

It might be quite entertaining and fun to discuss Mills theories but it matters not one whit whether his maths is right or wrong, the only discussion should be a question, "Do his generators work?"

He has claimed over decades that his generators work, he has claimed to have working models for decades, yet still cannot provide any that is the answer i.e. "no."

And by the way the idea that he is getting more energy out then he puts in is according to his own video not true, they have not yet been able to stop using external power to ..er.... power the "reaction!"

That's something I've been bringing up in my posts to their YouTube videos. Mills has a nearly 30 year track record of failure, always promising to be a few months from a production unit.

It doesn't even matter if the Mills theories are accurate. He's incapable of producing a commercial product.

 

[marplots]

No wonder these types of scams go on for so long when we all get drawn into pointless discussions which really are not any different from discussing whether Superman can survive an nuclear blast.

Nuclear blasts exist, superman doesn't!

Yeah, but if he did, he could.

(Just for the record.)

 

[Darat]

Yeah, but if he did, he could.

(Just for the record.)