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

[The Man]

Exactly - the “superposition” of two or more vector quantities at a point is a vector sum. In spite of your desperate and ridiculous claims the current density at any point must be single valued in exactly the same way that air velocity (a vector field) is single valued at a point.

Yes it does. If the current density is zero at a point that means precisely that there is no current flowing at that point. By the definition of current density.

Edit to add: the mathematical and physics ignorance of Mills’s supporters on this forum is a pale reflection of the pure nonsense on which Mills lies and fraud is based. OK RY?

It actually works out worse for his ridiculous ring claims. If one ring acts as though all other rings are not there then you just have that one ring. However, that is a limited perspective, as taken from the perspective of just that one ring and isn't inclusive of the perspective of all rings. As any other ring would act as though that ring was not there, thus the combined perspective of all rings is that no rings are there.

ETA: I'm starting to think that self-contradiction is the goal at least perhaps for mills. As we have markie claiming above that each ring behaves as if the others aren't there yet as I recall just recently asserted some coordinated effects (acting together) of said rings. So they have to be acting as if the others are there while also acting as if the others aren't there. As noted before in other instances 'wanting it both ways'.

Once a direct contradiction is considered true one can argue any position as valid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion

 

[HappySkeptic99]

Physically, that means that the current density over that spot is zero. The current density either is therefore zero over the entire orbitsphere, or is not constant over the entire orbitsphere, notwithstanding your increasingly desperate and incoherent attempts to have it both ways.

Dave

In Mills construction the current density is zero, when the angular momentum is zero, because every current loop has a matching current loop in the other direction, at essentially the same points in space. Those magic superconducting loops can do anything, apparently.

 

[The Man]

In Mills construction the current density is zero, when the angular momentum is zero, because every current loop has a matching current loop in the other direction, at essentially the same points in space. Those magic superconducting loops can do anything, apparently.

Except, apparently, produce a self-consistent theory.

 

[The Man]

Cue someone again saying the rings are just a mathematical tool, while simply ignoring the blatant mathematical failure of said rings.

 

[hecd2]

Self-contradiction is rampant in almost every statement. A rigid, non self-interacting entity, in which every infinitesimal element acts independently of every other but which is a “membrane”. A completely stable arrangement that is inherently unstable. It goes on and on.

 

[Reality Check]

Stupidity from markie because the question was for his education

Given: A sphere of uniform charge Q1 and radius r1.
Given: A point charge of charge Q2 is outside the sphere at a distance of r2 from the sphere.

What is the force between the point charge and the sphere?

Stupidity from markie because the question was for his education and the answer is easy!

The shell theorem shows that the sphere is equivalent to a point charge and the force is thus the Lorentz force between 2 point charges. The same shell theorem shows that the net force between a charged shell an interior charge is zero. Thus Mills' and now markie's stupidity of not addressing this fundamental physics. Mills' seems abysmally ignorant since he does not realize that the shell theorem exposes yet another flaw in his delusions. markie knows about the shell theorem and resorts to ignorant delusions about orbital mechanics, etc.

JeanTate tried to start a discussion with markie about real physics with a By setting the point charge outside the ring, I was prepared to explore symmetry...and only after all this, move the point charge to inside the ring/sphere. post.

 

[hecd2]

Stupidity from markie because the question was for his education and the answer is easy!

It’s not a question of knowing th answer for a sphere but of being able to derive the answer for a sphere and for a ring. Anyone can look up the result of the shell theorem, but that gives no physical insight if you can’t derive it. And it’s obvious that Markie doesn’t understand either the shell theorem or the results for a ring. Since both rings and spheres feature heavily in Mills nonsensical book, he should be able to.

 

[Lurch]

I check in here at ever decreasing frequency.

If I see another reference to a goddamned, bloody orbitsphere I just might murder someone. Why keep arguing with a brainwashed acolyte (or very interested shill), FFS?

Markie is so much like Drumpf; distract from the real issue so as to avoid the embarrassment of failure.

I'm sick of this acamedic discussion which isn't.

 

[Lurch]

I check in here at ever decreasing frequency.

If I see another reference to a goddamned, bloody orbitsphere I just might murder someone. Why keep arguing with a brainwashed acolyte (or very interested shill), FFS?

Markie is so much like Drumpf; distract from the real issue so as to avoid the embarrassment of failure.

I'm sick of this academic discussion which isn't.

 

[hecd2]

I check in here at ever decreasing frequency.

If I see another reference to a goddamned, bloody orbitsphere I just might murder someone. Why keep arguing with a brainwashed acolyte (or very interested shill), FFS?

Markie is so much like Drumpf; distract from the real issue so as to avoid the embarrassment of failure.

I'm sick of this academic discussion which isn't.

Don’t read it then.

 

[markie]

In Mills construction the current density is zero, when the angular momentum is zero, because every current loop has a matching current loop in the other direction, at essentially the same points in space. Those magic superconducting loops can do anything, apparently.

I don't know where you are getting this stuff. No, a current loop does not have a "matching current loop in the other direction, at essentially the same points in space." If that were the case the current loops would not produce a magnetic dipole. Rather, Mills has specifically constructed (back engineered) his orbitsphere to match the experimental results of experiment by incorporating those results as boundary conditions in his construction.

 

[JeanTate]

I don't know where you are getting this stuff. No, a current loop does not have a "matching current loop in the other direction, at essentially the same points in space." If that were the case the current loops would not produce a magnetic dipole. Rather, Mills has specifically constructed (back engineered) his orbitsphere to match the experimental results of experiment by incorporating those results as boundary conditions in his construction.

Has Mills/BLP been able, yet, to specifically construct (back engineer) his heat producing "cells" so they convert that heat into more usable energy? Sufficient that five working prototype generators will soon be shipped to truly independent testing facilities?

Has he/they been able, yet, to use his "orbitsphere" understanding to specifically produce (back engineer) useful quantities of hydrinos and hydrino compounds? Sufficient that a parcel of a dozen or so gram+ quantities of these will soon be shipped to truly independent testing facilities?

If - as I suspect - the answer to these questions is "no", why are we having this discussion? Shouldn't we be focused on things like what testing facilities Mills/BLP should use, and what timeframes are acceptable for the publication of their results?

 

[HappySkeptic99]

I don't know where you are getting this stuff. No, a current loop does not have a "matching current loop in the other direction, at essentially the same points in space." If that were the case the current loops would not produce a magnetic dipole. Rather, Mills has specifically constructed (back engineered) his orbitsphere to match the experimental results of experiment by incorporating those results as boundary conditions in his construction.

For the S orbital, its angular momentum is zero, and it has no magnetic dipole other than the spin. Spin has nothing to do with the current. For Mills to have zero angular momentum, he must have counter-rotating currents. He says as much.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

@HappySkeptic99


Do I remember you once mentioned having seen a prospectus? Can you tell anything about that?

 

[markie]

For the S orbital, its angular momentum is zero, and it has no magnetic dipole other than the spin. Spin has nothing to do with the current. For Mills to have zero angular momentum, he must have counter-rotating currents. He says as much.

Again, I don't know where you are getting this stuff. The angular momentum of the electron is not zero, it is h bar.

 

[wollery]

Again, I don't know where you are getting this stuff. The angular momentum of the electron is not zero, it is h bar.

Not the electron, the s-orbital.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

 

[Hans]

Has Mills/BLP been able, yet, to specifically construct (back engineer) his heat producing "cells" so they convert that heat into more usable energy? Sufficient that five working prototype generators will soon be shipped to truly independent testing facilities?

Has he/they been able, yet, to use his "orbitsphere" understanding to specifically produce (back engineer) useful quantities of hydrinos and hydrino compounds? Sufficient that a parcel of a dozen or so gram+ quantities of these will soon be shipped to truly independent testing facilities?

If - as I suspect - the answer to these questions is "no", why are we having this discussion? Shouldn't we be focused on things like what testing facilities Mills/BLP should use, and what timeframes are acceptable for the publication of their results?

Yeah its all 'entertainment' to distract and try to hide the failure of the scam to actually produce anything after 30 years and steer people away from considering multiple pronouncements from BLP (and earlier names) of coming commercialization....you know fraud.

Its all a waste of time

Bottom line - no hydrinos and no product - but a lot of money for Mills and friends.

 

[JeanTate]

Again, I don't know where you are getting this stuff. The angular momentum of the electron is not zero, it is h bar.

Who cares what's in Mills' BBoBB or not?

If Mills/BLP can't use what's in the BBoBB to produce some hydrinos (or hydrino compounds) which can be shipped to truly independent testing labs, why do you care?

The internet is replete with crazy pseudo-physics ideas (some of which have surfaced here in the ISF), why discuss yet another one, when the author of this one has made some remarkable "existence" claims ... yet has failed - for ~30 years! - to provide any evidence for such existence.

 

[WhatRoughBeast]

Again, I don't know where you are getting this stuff. The angular momentum of the electron is not zero, it is h bar.

And I don't know where you get your stuff. There are two types of electron angular momentum: intrinsic(spin) and orbital. And neither of them is h bar for a hydrogen atom.

 

[Reality Check]

Again, I don't know where you are getting this stuff. The angular momentum of the electron is not zero, it is h bar.

Everyone else knows about an election and hydrogen atom (including Mills!) even if you seem ignorant, markie.
An electron has an intrinsic angular moment (spin) of 1/2 h bar. An electron in an orbital also has an orbital angular moment. For the S-orbital that orbital angular moment is zero.

N.B. "orbital" has nothing to do with orbital mechanics which is gravitation. An atomic orbital is the set of possible positions for an electron in an atom. We have measured the positions of excited electrons in H atoms. They match what QM predicts. Electrons are found from close to the nucleus to far from the nucleus. They are not atom sized spheres !

Thus when someone writes In Mills construction the current density is zero, when the angular momentum is zero, because every current loop has a matching current loop in the other direction, at essentially the same points in space. and For the S orbital, its angular momentum is zero then they are writing about orbital angular momentum.

If Mills wants to match the real universe then his electron delusion has to have an orbital angular momentum of zero. That is impossible if all of his imagined currents are not balanced out. Each one rotating in one direction has to have another one rotating in the opposite direction. Look thru his deluded and lying book for 'orbital angular momentum' and there is plenty of gibberish but he does know that spin and orbital angular momenta are different.