• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
As was said earlier this is all well and good but of course is actually discussing whether Warp 9 is as fast as Standard by Twelve.

Let's get a working generator then we can see if any new physics is needed to explain how it works.
 
markie said:
As I've said before Rowan University has produced hydrino and detected them in multiple ways. There are lots of journal articles about the many methods used to detect hydrino. They all point to one thing: the existence of hydrino.
Click to expand...


Even if that were true, which we all know it is not, that’s one study. Homeopathy has more studies supporting it than Hydrino theory.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
What causes this to happen? What forces are acting on it to make this happen?
Click to expand...
In Mills Big Book of BooBoos, on page 345219.3/7i, you will learn that it’s the ancient, pre-classical physics “force of hugs”, which, thanks to neo-Darwinians, we now know is deep in each electron’s DNA. :D
 
markie said:
The free electron is a circular, planar sheet that can wrap around the nucleus.
Click to expand...
And what does the real world tell us, markie?
The real world of electron scattering tells us that a free electron has a size smaller than a nucleus and is spherical!

This is basic classical physics. Collide spheres and we see a certain distribution of scattering angles. Collide disks and we see an different distribution of scattering angles. Those distributions tell us that electrons cannot be disks. Now do the scattering for a range of energies. Apply classical physics and you get an upper limit for the size of electrons.

I suspect that Mills has deluded fantasies about his "electrons" magically acting the same as small, spherical particles when they collide.
 
Last edited:
Reality Check said:
And what does the real world tell us, markie?
The real world of electron scattering tells us that a free electron has a size smaller than a nucleus and is spherical!

This is basic classical physics. Collide spheres and we see a certain distribution of scattering angles. Collide disks and we see an different distribution of scattering angles. Those distributions tell us that electrons cannot be disks. Now do the scattering for a range of energies. Apply classical physics and you get an upper limit for the size of electrons.

I suspect that Mills has deluded fantasies about his "electrons" magically acting the same as small, spherical particles when they collide.
Click to expand...

No he doesn't make them act as small spherical particles on collision.
Given that you are familiar with chapter 3 where Mills describes the nature of the free electron, I would suggest you read chapter 8 where Mills derives the scattering angles for the free electron with neutral Helium. It works. I would recommend reading, at the very least, the discussion section starting on page 280 where Mills relates the shortcomings of QM in computing scattering angles.
 
Reality Check said:
And what does the real world tell us, markie?
The real world of electron scattering tells us that a free electron has a size smaller than a nucleus and is spherical!

This is basic classical physics. Collide spheres and we see a certain distribution of scattering angles. Collide disks and we see an different distribution of scattering angles. Those distributions tell us that electrons cannot be disks. Now do the scattering for a range of energies. Apply classical physics and you get an upper limit for the size of electrons.

I suspect that Mills has deluded fantasies about his "electrons" magically acting the same as small, spherical particles when they collide.
Click to expand...

Interesting. A few days ago you were insisting that electrons are point particles, now they are spheres - which is it? because the two definitions are definitely not the same. Given that scattering is about electrostatic interactions not billiards, any arguments would have to take into account the electromagnetic fields surrounding the particles and the "mechanics" of those interactions - that would definitely lead to a more meaningful discussion
 
UncertainH said:
Interesting. A few days ago you were insisting that electrons are point particles, now they are spheres - which is it? because the two definitions are definitely not the same.
Click to expand...

That, while true, misses the point. (Inserted here - sorry for the pun.) Electron scattering cannot resolve an electron below some size determined by the energies of the particles being scattered and the mass of the target. Below this threshold a point is indistinguishable from a sphere, so determination that the scattering is consistent with a sphere of some small dimension leaves the issue of point/sphere undecided. What it does do is establish that the electron is not a disk (unless it is a very small one).
 
markie, what causes a circular, planar electron to wrap around a nucleus? What forces act upon it to make this happen?
 
WhatRoughBeast said:
That, while true, misses the point. (Inserted here - sorry for the pun.) Electron scattering cannot resolve an electron below some size determined by the energies of the particles being scattered and the mass of the target. Below this threshold a point is indistinguishable from a sphere, so determination that the scattering is consistent with a sphere of some small dimension leaves the issue of point/sphere undecided. What it does do is establish that the electron is not a disk (unless it is a very small one).
Click to expand...

This would be true if electrons were actually particles. Neither QED nor Mills actually defines them as particles. They are waves, in both theories.
 
I'm certainly impressed how everyone is taking such a keen interest in the, um, box, or whatever it is that seems to be the center of interest in the video...
I'm sorry, was this a demonstration of something actually happening, or just how people busy themselves at BLP on a given day?
 
Last edited:
Arxiv paper postulating a "small hydrogen atom"

It's not being well-received by Mills followers because the author rejects Mills, and is apparently attempting to ensure that his/her hypothesis is compatible with the established laws of physics. How compatible it actually is I'm not in a position to say, although I can't imagine that it doesn't run into some of the same problems as Mills' "theory" does - most notably that if there was a state below the ground state then that would be the ground state and would be where you'd expect to find most hydrogen atoms in nature.
 
I guess when people hand you all sorts of cash, and they believe you*, you can just play and play and play and never really make anything useful.

The cash does buy nice looking models, though.

EDIT: * or you have them under contract
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom