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

[Reality Check]

But .....

15 January 2019 markie: No "vacuum catastrophe" in Mills GUTCP insanity because Mills has insane cosmology that denies dark energy!

 

[Reality Check]

Usual blind faith in Mills book of delusions and lies

I haven't looked but have little doubt...

15 January 2019 markie: Cannot understand basic math so replies with irrelevant gibberish.
22January 2019 markie: Usual blind faith in Mills book of delusions and lies.

 

[The Man]

If a physicist actually believes that a photon can interfere with another photon, I'd like to hear about it. It's when light interacts with matter that diffraction and interference patterns can be generated. Incoming light is absorbed by an atom and reemitted in directions that need not be entirely random, leading to potential patterning.

Again, I just told you about it, see interferometry. You even quoted me telling you about it. It is a whole field of broad scientific and technological application based specifically on the fact that electromagnetic waves interfere.

I also see you have changed "a light 'wave' does not interfere with a light wave" to doubting "a photon can interfere with another photon" as ineffectual as that change in terminology is.

 

[Reality Check]

If you're asking about how 'forbidden' the hydrino transitions are compared to hydrogen's highly forbidden 21cm transition, I'm not sure.

22January 2019 markie: Usual blind faith in Mills book of delusions and lies.

This is Mills stupid delusion of stating that his electronic transitions need "catalysts" to take away energy as if his imaginary energy levels are different from real ones. Real electrons emit photons and drop to the ground state. Extending electronic states to less than the ground state means that electrons drop even lower and emit even more photons (an infinite number as n -> -infinity).

There are rational and physical reasons why the 21 cm transition is "forbidden" in usual hydrogen gases and seen elsewhere.

 

[Reality Check]

I've read Phelps and Clementson several time a while ago.....

Emphasizes: 16 January 2019 markie: Rather insane lies about "Phelps' conjectures"

 

[abaddon]

Continues blind faith in Mills' obvious delusions and lies.

Hey there RC. Quick note to say I, at least, appreciate your posts. My own patience ran out along time ago, somewhere in the first ten years of the Mill's scam.

I don't engage much anymore because I would probably post something ill-advised.

Don't stop. I couldn't do it but it seems you can. More power to you.

 

[Reality Check]

Stupid fantasies about the European Space Agency, conflict of interest, and bias

It shouldn't be hard to see that ESA ...

Replies to 16 January 2019 markie: Paranoia and stupidity about Rathke's funding. with
22 January 2018 markie: Stupid fantasies about the European Space Agency, conflict of interest, and bias.
The ESA does not monitor obscure non-astronomy journals for crank papers .
The ESA would not monitor minor and obscure funding from the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts.
There is no conflict of interest or bias with an ESA scientist choosing to apply textbook physics to a crank paper that they found.

 

[Reality Check]

A "coherent" and "all scales" lie about Mills deluded and lying book

On the contrary, Mills' theory is coherent in that it describes phenomena on all scales based on the same principles. ....

22 January 2019 markie: A "coherent" and "all scales" lie about Mills deluded and lying book

Mills delusions about classic physics at nuclear, atomic and molecular scales only are incoherent and even insane (he states the strong force is electromagnetic!).
Mills incoherently abuses GR for larger scales.

 

[Reality Check]

Blind faith in Mills delusion of including spin that is only possible in QM

The electron has a spin up and spin down, basically the same as saying a north and south pole.

22 January 2019 markie: Blind faith in Mills delusion of including spin that is only possible in QM.

 

[markie]

Much like Mill's magical hydrinos, but who's counting?


You seem stuck on the false dichotomy of the basic structure, "Physicists don't know everything, thus Mill's hydrinos must be true."

As I've said, the flaws and catastrophes in modern physics don't prove Mills theory to be true at all. No way. But understand : even given that Mills' theory is largely correct, the particular 'hydrino' aspect is not - as far as I can tell - a 'necessary' fallout from the theory. It is consistent with the theory however, particularly if certain things are brought to bear on how sub ground states could be possible. (So for instance Mills has introduced the 'trapped' photon concept, which (for the hydrino state) magnifies the nuclear charge that the electron sees.) In the extremely unlikely scenario that - contrary to experimental results - hydrinos don't exist, Mills theory would still have much merit. Just wanted to clarify that.

However, it is very telling that here it is many days later and you still refused to answer my questions for you. Where is the cryodistilled dihydrino gas? Why did Mills just ermmm "dispose" of it rather than send it off to be verified, a trivially easy task much more straight forward than those mythical slag particles he calls hydrino crystals.

Maybe Mills has dihydrino gas stored on premises. I don't know. He probably still has shelves of hydrino hydride crystals in the building. Slag particles never looked so pretty.

 

[MEequalsIxR]

That was the argument in favour of epicycles as well: they "worked". They even worked better than the new upstart theory.

You keep bringing this up but it's not a good argument at all. The epicycles were basically calculated backwards to fit the observations so of course they were a good fit.

The upstart theory as you refer to it may not have fit the observations as well especially at first but it did something the epicycles never did - it explained why the orbits were as they are. Variations between observations and predictions of Uranus orbit led to speculation about and the subsequent discovery of Neptune and Lowell was said to have looked for Pluto (he called it planet X) because of further unexplained differences. The places where it doesn't fit really shows why it's a pretty good theory. It shows places where something is amiss and gives reason to look deeper and has led to discovery.

I just don't see mills work doing any of that. Unless of course some dihydrino turned up and could be verified...

 

[Reality Check]

Repeated delusion that the shell theorem does not apply

As has been pointed out repeatedly, the shell theorem does not apply ; orbital mechanics do apply.

22 January 2019 markie: Repeated delusion that the shell theorem does not apply to a an charged body inside a charged shell.

A "orbital mechanics do apply" lie because is gravity, not electromagnetism.
Electromagnetism would make Mills actually insane (charges in orbit radiate energy and fall into the center). But that is not this one of Mills delusion. Mills ignoring the shell theorem for his deluded electron sphere is part of what makes Mills deluded.
Charges flowing in loops (Mills "current loops") are even less stable than charges on a sphere.

 

[markie]

Which upstart theory was that?

That Kepler fellow with his crazy idea of ellipses. Had he not made so many errors in the tabulations, nor mixed his three laws with some rather questionable metaphysics perhaps his theory would have taken seed earlier and more readily rather than decades after his death. Good thing that Galileo and Newton came along soon afterwards and substantiated his theory.

 

[Reality Check]

I'm only posting here in the hopes that someone has something relevant to say about the GUTCP-based derivations for the spin flip and the 1 thru 20 electron ions that seem impossible according to QM.

The relevant answers are:

• A book full of delusions and lies as listed for you is not a reliable source of science.
• Mills lies abut "spin flip" because Mills includes QM spin.
• Mills lies about having matches with those "1 thru 20 electron ions" values.
• Spin flips are a standard part of QM.
• Calculation of those "1 thru 20 electron ions" are a standard part of QM and thus extremely possible !
• We do not all claim "numerology".
  I claim deluded physics that accidentally gets close to some ionization values. I have known that Mills has written a deluded and lying book for about 2 years now. I will not waste my time finding out why his deluded physics almost works when it clearly does not work!
• A lie about "correct physics and mathematical results" when Mills has obviously deluded physics and results that do not match the real world.

 

[markie]

Of course, this is directly relevant, because Mills claims to be tapping into Dark Energy, as the ultimate source of the free energy for his non-existent generators. Right?

No, not "Dark Energy". Just simple old fashioned electrical potential energy possessed by the electron in hydrogen's ground state.

 

[markie]

You keep repeating that, but no explanation of why the shell theorem does not apply. It has to be one of the following:

1. The orbitsphere is not spherical.

2. The charge is not evenly distributed over the surface of the orbitsphere.

3. The attractive force between opposite charges is not proportional to the inverse square of distance.

4. Math doesn't work.

... but which one?

None of the above really. The Shell Theorem has to do with a static, charged shell within which there is a uniform field that exerts no net force. This is not descriptive of Mills' hydrogen atom, which is comprised of a moving charged electron shell within which is a central proton and its strong radial electrical field that ends at the electron shell. Apples to Oranges.

 

[Reality Check]

If a physicist actually believes that a photon can interfere with another photon, I'd like to hear about it..

This is close to yet another possible Mills delusions, markie.

Classical physics states that photons can never scatter off each other because they have no charge. Thus Mills has to deny two-photon physics (the prediction in QM that photons do scatter and the study of that scattering).

 

[markie]

Or, in other words, Mills incorporates QM into his supposedly purely classical “theory”.

Just that he doesn’t say so.

Sure he does, all over the book. In fact his book used to have the word "quantum" in the title. Mills is generally fine with much of the pre Heisenberg QM.

 

[Reality Check]

... moving charged electron shell within which is a central proton and its strong radial electrical field that ends at the electron shell..

Remove "moving" and that is the shell theorem yet again !

There are no net forces between the charged static electron shell and the proton. That includes your "strong radial electrical field that ends at the electron shell".

Mills stupidity is not showing that whatever his delusions are about "moving" add additional forces that fix a proton inside his shell.

 

[Myriad]

Remove "moving" and that is the shell theorem yet again !

There are no net forces between the charged static electron shell and the proton. That includes your "strong radial electrical field that ends at the electron shell".

Mills stupidity is not showing that whatever his delusions are about "moving" add additional forces that fix a proton inside his shell.

Yep. If the electron charge is uniformly distributed over the entire sphere, then the movement of the sphere is irrelevant. At time t: the charge is uniformly distributed. At time t+ε: movement of the sphere has supposedly occurred, but the charge is still uniformly distributed. No difference. No effect on the charge distribution. No way for the proton to "feel" the movement in any way. Thus, by the Shell Theorem, the electron shell exerts no net centering force on the proton.