Cont: Brilliant Light Power Going To Market - Free Energy Generator Part 3

[The Man]

You misunderstand. The Pauli exclusion principle and Hund's rule were not postulated by Mills, they were postulated by Pauli and Hund. Unlike Pauli and Hund, Mills gives reasons for the particulars regarding orbital filling.

Nope you misunderstand and apparently deliberately misrepresent. I did not say "The Pauli exclusion principle and Hund's rule were" "postulated by Mills". I said "deduced from", as was your assertion, other self-contradictory crap he "merely postulated". That you even quoted me saying specifically that and not what you simply represented demonstrates your deliberate misrepresentation.

 

[The Man]

We've been through this before. A electron spherical shell of negative charge will have no field inside it. However if a proton is placed inside there will be radial field coming out from the proton and ending at the shell. So the shell will experience an attractive force from the proton.

Now, you are correct that with static charges the proton won't have a preferred location inside the sphere. But these are not static charges. They are moving, resulting in magnetic forces from both the electron and the internally moving central proton. There could be for instance magnetic flux 'lines' holding the proton in the centre.

Nope, as we have been over this before, not based on Mills assertions. His counter rotating and every which way rings or loops provide their own counter argument. For any one ring one can postulate some possible magnetic effect there is another counter moving ring, loop or charge that cancels such effect.

As we have been over this before I'll forgo the usual part where I give you a chance to respond with the same arguments that have been countered before. So the rings, loops or whatever don't 'interact' as a result those magnetic influences don't cancel. Great then they can't sum to effect the proton magnetically, because once you do permit them to sum they sum to zero and if you don't permit them to sum the effect on the proton is still zero. Again the biggest counter arguments to Mills' assertions are simply, well, Mills' assertions.

 

[markie]

You've cleverly left out the fact, also stated in that article, that experiments have universally and overwhelmingly violated Bell's inequalities. The predictions of quantum mechanics are found to be correct, and this together with Bell's Theorem therefore demonstrates that no physical theory of locally hidden variables can predict the overwhelming weight of data that shows that Bell's inequalities are universally violated. There was, in fact, no exaggeration.

Dave

Well I take it as a given that experiments violate Bell's inequalities. The point is that those inequalities assume certain things like quantum statistics, which Mills does not use.

 

[markie]

At least that's what Mills says. Never mind the fact he's published NO research to support those claims.



Just recycle any one of the past reports over the last 20 years where he promises a revolutionary commercial product in 6 to 18 months.

On the contrary Mills has published much about the particulars of hydrino hydride compounds.

 

[markie]

So we have a gap: Dark Matter. And we have a "god": the Hydrino. Textbook in my opinion.

But IF dark matter is Hydrinos and Hydrinos are detectable. Why do we not detect them in nature? They should be frigging everywhere!?

Same reason we can't detect hydrogen gas in the atmosphere; it is very buoyant and rises in the atmosphere, I think to the point of reaching escape velocity.

Remember that Mills has not only found the identity of dark matter, he has found the source of so-called dark energy which is causing the acceleration of universe expansion. Two huge problems for modern physics.

 

[The Man]

Well I take it as a given that experiments violate Bell's inequalities. The point is that those inequalities assume certain things like quantum statistics, which Mills does not use.

Ah, so the experiments confirm the validity of using "quantum statistics", yet Mill does not use them. What statistics does Mills use?

 

[markie]

Mills' magic re dark matter and hydrinos may seem vaguely plausible if you stick with popsci explanations and if you are not involved in research related to it.

Just as ISF members who have relevant expertise and experience in engineering, physics, chemistry (and more) has said - via many posts here - that Mills' magic is just that (magic) re so many of his claims, so too with dark matter.

Those astronomers, astrophysicists, and particle physicists who study dark matter (in a general sense) will instantly recognize that Mills' writing on this topic is nonsense (or magic, if you prefer). And it's not for lack of interest! What dark matter actually is is a very hot topic, with thousands of exceedingly clever people working on one aspect or another of it, full-time. If Mills' ideas on this had legs, someone would have picked at least a core aspect up and ran with it, likely over a decade ago; instead, those who've come across it regard it as crackpot nonsense at best (I prefer "magic").

Again, markie, you do Mills no favors at all by trying to present and defend Mills on this, and even fewer favors by posting stuff that's nothing better than cherry-picked popsci.

If you like magic, the virtual particles (including negative energy and momentum) of QED and the inflation theory of cosmology (etc) should keep you entertained and perhaps entrained.

 

[markie]

Markie indicated above:



But in that case one of the recent attempts to detect dark matter particle collisions with ordinary matter, such as the XENON1T experiment, should have succeeded.

This is an example of needing to know what you are looking for in order to find it. Cosmologists simple do not know what to look for regarding WIMPs, except to rule out certain things like neutrinos.

The XENOT1T experiment is incapable of detecting molecular dihydrino, just as it is incapable of detecting atmospheric nitrogen gas.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

The XENOT1T experiment is incapable ...

Isn't it a bit earth-centric to think that life on other planets will include mammals?

 

[markie]

Sorry flash cubes are already obsolete technology and never really actually generated energy anyway. They did have huge power densities, but that was from burning highly reactive metallic compounds like silver fulminate or other metals like magnesium usually. Once the reactants finished burning, the flash stopped.

The reason Mills hasn't yet has nothing to do with marketability Markie. Not even Mills claims anything as silly as that. There are gazillions of things we discovered about the Universe that still as of yet never produced anything marketable. Never will either. You will NEVER be able to go down to the farmers market and buy a dozen black holes for dinner! But we do have evidence they exist.

Focus Markie. This is your hero Mills talking. Listen carefully.

"One goal is to prove our power source to the world in the
near term through power measurements, identification of
the hydrino products of the reaction, and engineered
power systems."

Mills says his GOAL for the future is to prove its existence through power measurements! Focus hard Markie. A goal for the future is something not done yet! Think clearly. If Mills had unequivocal power measurements proving hydrino technology and excluding all other reasonable sources for those anomalous readings, this would not be a near term goal, it would be an accomplished task. It wouldn't need to be in a finished marketable form, just functioning enough to prove the technology.

Next part is similar. Mills says his GOAL for the future is "identification of the hydrino products of the reaction". Again this near term goal would not exist if those so called "hydrino chrystals" we discussed before had actually been identified and actually contained any novel hydrino compounds. They were not and have never been found to contain any hydrinos. NONE Even Mills understands this is a needed near term goal, not an already accomplished task. Only silly you clings to the last failed attempt to identify hydrinos in any products of the reactants from his equipment. Mills certainly understands no hydrinos were found yet. Otherwise it would not be a goal for the future! D'oh. Any compound would do. Whether marketable or not is irrelevant.

The final part is where you picked up the marketability. This indeed would be a near term goal after the above two near term goals were accomplished. First show they function or exist (not done yet) then engineer something marketable. That of course hasn't yet been done either, because the first part hasn't been done yet!

I appreciate your concern. The operative phrase is "to the world". Clearly proving hydrino technology to the world has not be achieved. It has been achieved even twenty years ago for those who have cared enough to take the experiments and theory at face value. With the SunCell the there will undeniable (to the larger scientific community) power production, energy production and hydrino hydride compound production. So not just the occasional hydrino hydride metallic bond in a crystal, measurable as it is. Not just tiny amounts of dihydrino gas trapped in a getter, measurable as it is. But bulk 'hydrino in a bottle'.

 

[markie]

25 July 2018 markie: A "within experimental limits" lie since page 155 of Mills book has no experimental limits.
I wrote the experimental value that he gave in full: 1057.845 MHz, no experimental errors. Mills gets 1057.09 MHz.

17 July 2018: Page 155: Mills lies that his predicted value agrees with the experimental value of the hydrogen Lamb shift

Mills has a reference for that 1057.845 MHz value: 42. P. J. Mohr, B. N. Taylor, D. B. Newell, “CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2006,” Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 80, (2008), pp. 633-73/.
Here it is: CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physicalconstants: 2014 and

25 July 2018: Page 155: Mills lies that Mohr et. al. have 1057.845 MHz as the hydrogen Lamb shift.
This is at least bad scholarship. Mohr et. al. discuss Lamb shift and charitably one of their references has a value.

ETA: A bit of research and I find this course from 2008.
Lamb Shift in Atomic Hydrogen (PDF)

The author is being honest - the values are not in good agreement which suggests within errors but different vales, they are just close. The theoretical value is also much closer than Mills!

Again, Mills value of the Lamb shift is dependent on the precision of values of fundamental constants. The formulae are complex enough that I couldn't property quantify the propagate error, but I take Mills' word for it. Mills doesn't have the luxury of calling upon virtual photons and vacuum polarizations and a correlation factor to achieve a more accurate value.

 

[Horatius]

And Wikipedia lists Conective Solutions as an investor as well, along with rexresearch.com.

OK, so how about something more recent?

After that, nada.

And that's consistent with my suggestion that this was some super-speculative pie in the sky type investment. They dropped a few bucks on him 20 years ago, but they won't follow up that investment with anything more until they see some tangible return. Being in the best position to be allowed to see such returns, it's telling that even these guys, who were willing to take a flyer on Mills 20 years ago, have gone no further.

 

[markie]

Missed the point I put in bold so:



Dark matter might not be interactive after all is evidence that dark matter does not interact electromagnetically. There was an observation that a galaxy had become separated from the dark matter surrounding it as predicted with dark matter interacting with non-gravity forces. New data says the dark matter did not separate and thus does not support dark matter with forces other than gravity. That agrees with all of the other evidence that dark matter passes though normal matter, i.e. does not measurably interact electromagnetically.

Colliding galaxies pass through each other with minimal interaction apart from gravity. Also dark matter findings vary one from another. I doubt there is anywhere near conclusive evidence that dark matter passed unimpeded through normal matter in a manner like (say) neutrinos pass through normal matter.

 

[markie]

27 July 2018 markie: An ignorant fantasy about the forces on a charge in a uniformly charged sphere
What he misses out is that the "attractive force from the proton" will pull on the sphere equally in all directions. It is obvious for a proton at the center of the sphere that the net force will be zero. It needs a bit of math to see that the net force is zero for the proton everywhere within the sphere.

There are excellent reasons why Mills electron as a charged atom sized sphere is deluded. The measured size of bound electrons is less than the size of a proton. Electrons, positrons, alpha particles, and neutrons from radioactive decay pass though that delusion without any measurable effects. No sign of the delusion from scattering of charged particles.

This disconnection between the proton and electron is why Mills electron delusion is actually insane. Even markie seems to know now that the net force is zero for the proton everywhere within Mills electron delusion. That is basic electromagnetics taught in high schools or early university physics classes. That is basic electromagnetics that Mills has to know. It is literally insanely ignorant for Mills not to address that basic flaw.

markie emulates Mills spouting of delusions with his own ignorant fantasy about moving charges + magnetic fields magically holding the proton in the center.
Less fanciful would be citing where Mills addresses that flaw with physics and math. markie?

I haven't heard Mills address the issue. But for an example of how magnetic flux can lock a superconducting object (with defects) into place at a distance and yet enable it to move see
https://youtu.be/Vxror-fnOL4?t=1m23s

 

[markie]

Is the Great Randino cashing out?

1) Brilliant Light Power is located ("headquartered") at 493 Old Trenton Rd, Cranbury, NJ (reference: BLP website**). This property is sometimes listed as being in neighboring East Windsor rather than Cranbury.

2) Also headquartered at the same address is "Blacklight Real Estate" with contact Randell Mills which has estimated revenue of $925,288 (reference: Buzzfile, search companies located at 493 Old Trenton Rd, Cranbury, NJ**).

3) While the exact source of that estimated revenue is unknown, Blacklight Real Estate has owned a single property listed in NJ tax records as "493 Edinburg Rd, East Windsor, NJ" since 1998. Despite the different apparent address, this is actually the same property where BLP is located (reference: njparcels website). The estimated value of this property in NJ Tax Records is $5.2M (reference: NJ tax records**, compare below).

4) This suggests that Randy is the owner of the property where Brilliant Light Power is located and pays himself ~$925,000 in rent yearly in addition to whatever salary he is paying himself as Chairman of the Board, President, and CEO Director. This type of arrangement is typically legal but would be a substantial portion of the investment income raised by Brilliant Light Power.

5) The property where Brilliant Light Power is located is currently for sale from owner/user for $5,000,000 (see listing for 493 Old Trenton Rd, East Windsor, NJ on loopnet** which also has some fun photos). This would give Randy a cool $3,000,000 profit over his $2,000,000 1998 purchase price.

Nice gig to make $900,000+ in addition to your salary every year from energy investors. I wonder if they're ok with how their money is being used?

I am also curious though whether selling the property means he is finally cashing out for good and retiring.


** I am a new user, so can't post urls yet.

Number 4 is a huge leap. I could speculate more reasonably that Dr. Mills operates a real estate investment opportunity for his employees, since most of them can't invest in BLP because they are not accredited investors.

 

[markie]

Which laws?

As mentioned some time ago, this article gives a good description of the very limited scope labs have to use a process patented by another party.

http://nysstlc.syr.edu/experimental-use-exception-to-patent-infringement/

 

[markie]

Copyright law is generally appropriate to works of fiction.

It reminds me of the Baigent and Leigh suit against Dan Brown for allegedly plaigiarising "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" in "The Da Vinci Code." One of the main objections to their case was that they insisted that their work was a historical study rather than a work of fiction, which meant that they couldn't sue Brown for using it as a source of plot elements; only if they'd admitted that the whole thing was made up could they have asserted copyright.

So markie is in a cleft stick here. Either hydrinos are protected by IP law, which would require Mills to admit they're fictitious, or they're not, in which case there's no reason for nobody else to have detected them.

Dave

It's the various processes to create them, not hydrinos themselves, which are patented. Not to be confused with the trademarked name Hydrino.

 

[markie]

Well, I got tired of waiting, so I went and bought a natural gas generator. It actually exists - on a concrete pad in the backyard and comes on reliably when the grid power goes down. Sure would have liked to have one of them fancy hydrino units though. Shame it wasn't available.

Congrats. You'll be sitting pretty when the grid goes down.
Don't expect a SunCell available for domestic use within the next eight years. Years of regulatory processes to go through. It will be used in industry first.

 

[markie]

Hardly a compelling point since, as you have noted here, Mills asserts one can get "correct results with" the wrong physics.

It's quite amazing really how very different math approaches can be used to derive the same results. A perhaps famous example would be Feynman's operators vs Schwinger and his Greens function approach. It took Freeman Dyson to finally show they were the same as I recall.

 

[markie]

Nope, as we have been over this before, not based on Mills assertions. His counter rotating and every which way rings or loops provide their own counter argument. For any one ring one can postulate some possible magnetic effect there is another counter moving ring, loop or charge that cancels such effect.

As we have been over this before I'll forgo the usual part where I give you a chance to respond with the same arguments that have been countered before. So the rings, loops or whatever don't 'interact' as a result those magnetic influences don't cancel. Great then they can't sum to effect the proton magnetically, because once you do permit them to sum they sum to zero and if you don't permit them to sum the effect on the proton is still zero. Again the biggest counter arguments to Mills' assertions are simply, well, Mills' assertions.

They will sum, but they won't sum to zero. There is not a perfect symmetry of loops going through a given point.

And lets not confuse the mathematics with the physical reality. We can talk about say, magnetic field lines, but they are just a 1D construct. The reality is a 3D field. Going further if we have multiple magnetic sources each has a field around it independent of the others, as if the others didn't exist. At any one point in space one can sum these different fields and get a certain value. But that does not mean the the physical reality is that certain value! The physical reality is a so called superposition of different fields intersecting at that point resulting in a certain value.

Now imagine not static 1D magnetic field lines in 3D but moving 1D current loops that carry mass and charge on a 2D surface. Like different magnetic fields they can superimpose. But the reality is a moving 2D surface, not the 1D lines, nor the 0D point of intersection, both of which are only used for mathematical and visualization purposes.