ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Brilliant Light Power , free energy , Randell Mills

Closed Thread
Old 10th January 2017, 10:39 AM   #201
michaelsuede
Graduate Poster
 
michaelsuede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,416
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
That hardly seems equivalent to your claims.
You are saying that by March this year a production model will be available.
No one ever claimed that wrt Tokomak.
You assured me specifically that this model will not see it's production scraped due to promises of even greater power o/p from a redesign. What other issues then can we expect to arise that will stop production?

The question then stands, if this hydrino based tech is not rolled out in one year, 5 years, 10 years will you admit it's bogus?
Oh I think it is entirely equivalent.

The ITER team has blown over 14 billion just to make a proof of concept that can't even run over-unity. The ITER was initially formed back in 1985, so that's 32 years ago. So 32 years and 14 billion flushed down the toilet and they don't even have a working proof of concept yet.

Mills has taken half the time with a hundredth of the resources to go from theory to functional reactor, and now on to a functional generator. Yet I don't see you complaining that fusion reactors aren't real. In terms of progress, Mills team makes the ITER team look like a bunch of turtles.

Last edited by michaelsuede; 10th January 2017 at 10:41 AM.
michaelsuede is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 10:50 AM   #202
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 20,374
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
......Mills has taken half the time with a hundredth of the resources to go from theory to functional reactor......
You have produced not a single jot of evidence to support this claim. Any chance you could correct this teensy weensy little oversight? If he's got a reactor, he's got some actual figures, not "ball park" stuff. How about linking to these?
__________________
The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 10:51 AM   #203
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 13,144
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
This thing is not fuel free - it converts hydrogen into hydrinos. That's a concern when you are going to start converting olympic-sized swimming pools worth of water. I like water.

I haven't yet seen how these hydrinos are supposed to be disposed of. Remember how great nuclear sounded until someone pointed out we have to store all the waste?

I don't want hydrinos getting into the environment, causing damage. What is he doing with them now?

I was thinking the same thing. Atoms don't have to be above their ground states to react chemically, so how reactive is Hydrino or Hydrino2? Does it react with oxygen to form Hydrino2O, and if so, what effect does that have on water contaminated by it? Does it affect metabolic pathways? Does it bio-accumulate? Do even parts-per-trillion concentrations smell strongly of cat vomit? How can it be filtered out? How can it be stored?

The EPA might have something to say about this, but their hands are tied, as long as there's no evidence the stuff actually exists.
__________________
A zÝmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 10:53 AM   #204
michaelsuede
Graduate Poster
 
michaelsuede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,416
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
You have produced not a single jot of evidence to support this claim. Any chance you could correct this teensy weensy little oversight? If he's got a reactor, he's got some actual figures, not "ball park" stuff. How about linking to these?
You mean other than three peer-reviewed journal articles published in reputable journals, four validation papers from three separate universities, several public demonstration videos where the reactor is test fired and measured against bomb calorimetry and a spectrograph, and a video where 1/4th inch thick tungsten rods are vaporized in seconds.

But as you say, "not a single jot of evidence to support this claim"
michaelsuede is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 10:54 AM   #205
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 20,374
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
Oh believe me, I'll be making a stink once the first prototype generator goes public. We might see that by February or March.
You may have overlooked this post:

Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
It seems that BLP (used to be Black Light Power), has been making precisely the same claims (commercially ready in the next 12 to 18 months) since 2008:

Wiki.
He's been making precisely the same claim (ready in 12 to 18 months) for 9 years now. Does that not tell you anything?
__________________
The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 10:56 AM   #206
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 20,374
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
You mean other than three peer-reviewed journal articles published in reputable journals, four validation papers from three separate universities, several public demonstration videos where the reactor is test fired and measured against bomb calorimetry and a spectrograph, and a video where 1/4th inch thick tungsten rods are vaporized in seconds....
You've seen the critique of those papers, just a few posts up the thread, no doubt. Oh, and scientists don't normally announce the breaking of the laws of physics with a youtube clip.
__________________
The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 10:58 AM   #207
michaelsuede
Graduate Poster
 
michaelsuede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,416
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
You've seen the critique of those papers, just a few posts up the thread, no doubt. Oh, and scientists don't normally announce the breaking of the laws of physics with a youtube clip.
Yeah, you announce it in three separate peer-reviewed journals, which is what he did.

You'll have to link me directly to this critique of his papers. I must be blind because I can't see it.
michaelsuede is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:00 AM   #208
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 16,889
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
Oh I think it is entirely equivalent.

The ITER team has blown over 14 billion just to make a proof of concept that can't even run over-unity. The ITER was initially formed back in 1985, so that's 32 years ago. So 32 years and 14 billion flushed down the toilet and they don't even have a working proof of concept yet.

Mills has taken half the time with a hundredth of the resources to go from theory to functional reactor, and now on to a functional generator. Yet I don't see you complaining that fusion reactors aren't real. In terms of progress, Mills team makes the ITER team look like a bunch of turtles.
Incorrect, Mills started in 1991, 25 years ago, and has nothing to show for 25 years of nonsense.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:01 AM   #209
michaelsuede
Graduate Poster
 
michaelsuede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,416
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Incorrect, Mills started in 1991, 25 years ago, and has nothing to show for 25 years of nonsense.
You mean nothing to show for it except:
  • three peer-reviewed journal articles published in reputable journals
  • four validation papers from three separate universities
  • several public demonstration videos where the reactor is test fired and measured against bomb calorimetry and a spectrograph
  • and a video where 1/4th inch thick tungsten rods are vaporized in seconds - which no known energy source is capable of doing.
michaelsuede is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:06 AM   #210
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
I was thinking the same thing. Atoms don't have to be above their ground states to react chemically, so how reactive is Hydrino or Hydrino2? Does it react with oxygen to form Hydrino2O, and if so, what effect does that have on water contaminated by it? Does it affect metabolic pathways? Does it bio-accumulate? Do even parts-per-trillion concentrations smell strongly of cat vomit? How can it be filtered out? How can it be stored?

The EPA might have something to say about this, but their hands are tied, as long as there's no evidence the stuff actually exists.
That's a common problem - government inertia - that I hope to see solved in the new Trump administration. I sincerely doubt the FDA has a handle on hydrino toxicity/pollution. However, I bet if we tip off Mr. Trump, he'll personally get involved.

Remember, there is no danger more feared than spurious, fictive danger linked to the unknown and unproven.

And thank you for pointing out it isn't just the element that raises concerns, but the compounds. Starting with mono-hydrino hydroxide, extending through di-hydrino oxide and on to thousands of hydrinated hydrinocarbons. Almost any organic molecule is subject to the chemical depredations of this as-yet-not-actually-existing atom.

Like the ads say, "Be sure to ask your doctor, folks!"
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:15 AM   #211
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 13,144
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
Oh I think it is entirely equivalent.

The ITER team has blown over 14 billion just to make a proof of concept that can't even run over-unity. The ITER was initially formed back in 1985, so that's 32 years ago. So 32 years and 14 billion flushed down the toilet and they don't even have a working proof of concept yet.

Mills has taken half the time with a hundredth of the resources to go from theory to functional reactor, and now on to a functional generator. Yet I don't see you complaining that fusion reactors aren't real. In terms of progress, Mills team makes the ITER team look like a bunch of turtles.

It is BLP's claims, not the theory of fusion, that suffers by this comparison. Clearly, physicists managed to establish firm evidence that fusion reactions exist and convert mass to energy, based on theoretical foundations and observations of natural systems (e.g. the sun), before they produced any man-made fusion reactions (via hydrogen bombs) and without producing a commercially viable fusion power plant at all (so far).

Likewise we can be pretty sure that tadpoles generate and use (metabolic) energy to twitch their tails, without having ever conceived of or built a commercially viable tadpole-tail-twitch-fueled electrical power plant.

Why would the first clear evidence that energy release from hydrogen decay into hydrinos is a real phenomenon be seeing commercial generators run on it? That makes no sense. It's like some late 19th century petroleum chemists saying, "we've discovered a hydrocarbon we call gasoline, but we won't be able to demonstrate its existence until we've perfected the 'quad-wheel internal combustion vehicle' that'll use it for fuel." Nonsense. Show us some in a beaker. Show it producing heat and pressure when burned in a vessel under controlled conditions. The steering wheel and cup holders can be developed later.
__________________
A zÝmbie once bit my sister...

Last edited by Myriad; 10th January 2017 at 11:17 AM.
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:16 AM   #212
michaelsuede
Graduate Poster
 
michaelsuede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,416
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
That's a common problem - government inertia - that I hope to see solved in the new Trump administration. I sincerely doubt the FDA has a handle on hydrino toxicity/pollution. However, I bet if we tip off Mr. Trump, he'll personally get involved.

Remember, there is no danger more feared than spurious, fictive danger linked to the unknown and unproven.

And thank you for pointing out it isn't just the element that raises concerns, but the compounds. Starting with mono-hydrino hydroxide, extending through di-hydrino oxide and on to thousands of hydrinated hydrinocarbons. Almost any organic molecule is subject to the chemical depredations of this as-yet-not-actually-existing atom.

Like the ads say, "Be sure to ask your doctor, folks!"
There is no pollution. The reactor will be closed and under vacuum. Hydrinos themselves are non-reactive and vent into space since they are lighter than air.

Of course, the only way to test for hydrino oxides and the like is to base the tests off Mills theory, which according to you is wrong. So good luck finding a test the EPA/FDA can agree on.

Last edited by michaelsuede; 10th January 2017 at 11:17 AM.
michaelsuede is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:16 AM   #213
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 16,889
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
You mean nothing to show for it except:
  • three peer-reviewed journal articles published in reputable journals
  • four validation papers from three separate universities
  • several public demonstration videos where the reactor is test fired and measured against bomb calorimetry and a spectrograph
  • and a video where 1/4th inch thick tungsten rods are vaporized in seconds - which no known energy source is capable of doing.
Great. After 25 years of this crap, where can I buy one of these devices that have been promised for a generation?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:20 AM   #214
aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
 
aleCcowaN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 7,566
Originally Posted by michaelsuede
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Sounds amazing. What's the patent number so I can look it up?
I believe BrLP has dozens, if not hundreds of patents filed. So you might need to be more specific.
You do believe? What kind of belief is it? The "I believe in God" kind, the one that includes no evidence of a God?
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated, or covfefe your soul!
These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out.
I got tired of the actual schizophrenics that are taking hold part of the forum and decided to do something about it.
aleCcowaN is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:22 AM   #215
michaelsuede
Graduate Poster
 
michaelsuede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,416
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Great. After 25 years of this crap, where can I buy one of these devices that have been promised for a generation?
Well, I'd start by asking the ITER why fusion isn't a reality yet. You'll get the same response from the ITER team as you will from Mills and his team.
michaelsuede is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:24 AM   #216
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 17,372
This has been highly entertaining in an Onion sort of way
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:26 AM   #217
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 16,889
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
Well, I'd start by asking the ITER why fusion isn't a reality yet. You'll get the same response from the ITER team as you will from Mills and his team.
You mean endless excuses?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:28 AM   #218
michaelsuede
Graduate Poster
 
michaelsuede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,416
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
You mean endless excuses?
touchť
michaelsuede is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:33 AM   #219
aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
 
aleCcowaN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 7,566
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
  • several public demonstration videos where the reactor is test fired and measured against bomb calorimetry and a spectrograph
Were those videos made near to broadcasting antennas?

Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
  • and a video where 1/4th inch thick tungsten rods are vaporized in seconds - which no known energy source is capable of doing.
Was that video made near to broadcasting antennas?

I mean, it's never lupus...
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated, or covfefe your soul!
These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out.
I got tired of the actual schizophrenics that are taking hold part of the forum and decided to do something about it.
aleCcowaN is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:34 AM   #220
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,253
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Great. After 25 years of this crap, where can I buy one of these devices that have been promised for a generation?
You'll need to send them a lot of money first, but they'll be operational really soon. They're so reliable, they've been almost operational for decades now. Just a few more of your bucks is all they need to go public with this Nobel prize winning, laws of physics breaking, world transforming tech they've been sitting on for years without ever putting it to practical use.

Unless of course they discover that solar panels aren't the best way to harness this spectacular free energy. Then they'll be forced to shelve their groundbreaking work that's worth billions untill they've found another scapegoat... er... I mean viable way to put this tech into cars before they revolutionize all aspects of our lives forever.

Because there's no way they could get funding for a contraption that can only produce unlimited free energy on an industrial scale. They need your precious dollars instead.
But it really works, I promise.
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:41 AM   #221
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 16,889
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
You'll need to send them a lot of money first, but they'll be operational really soon. They're so reliable, they've been almost operational for decades now. Just a few more of your bucks is all they need to go public with this Nobel prize winning, laws of physics breaking, world transforming tech they've been sitting on for years without ever putting it to practical use.

Unless of course they discover that solar panels aren't the best way to harness this spectacular free energy. Then they'll be forced to shelve their groundbreaking work that's worth billions untill they've found another scapegoat... er... I mean viable way to put this tech into cars before they revolutionize all aspects of our lives forever.

Because there's no way they could get funding for a contraption that can only produce unlimited free energy on an industrial scale. They need your precious dollars instead.
But it really works, I promise.
Sounds like the homeopathy baloney to me.

At least ITER is dealing with a known process called fusion. And is testing all manner of issues like environmental impact and such.

The Mills fantasy invokes an unknown process with unknown effects. One might as well invoke mill wheels powered by unicorns.

Oh, he is doing that. Sorry.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:41 AM   #222
michaelsuede
Graduate Poster
 
michaelsuede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,416
Actually you don't need to send them any money. BrLP is fully capitalized all the way to production.
michaelsuede is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:49 AM   #223
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,193
Not really fair, He claims they have been operating for many years but never released because there was always a better version to be developed.
Thunk Ford developing the Model T but not selling any because one day there would be a Mustang.
Captain_Swoop is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:51 AM   #224
RussDill
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Charleston
Posts: 5,405
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
Bwhahaha! Where do they say that?
The CNN interview. It's the latest video in their stream on YT.

Quote:
Yeah, as you and Aepervius point out, claiming to have created dark matter is a gigantic (and bogus) claim, but claiming to have detected it with their setup at all is ridiculous, and claiming they detected it through spectroscopy is absolutely hilarious. It's like saying, "we created enough antimatter that we were able to put it in a test tube and identify it with color changes in litmus paper".

Ha ha ha! Did they really say that? That's priceless.
Mills himself says it.
__________________
The woods are lovely, dark and deep
but i have promises to keep
and lines to code before I sleep
And lines to code before I sleep
RussDill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:51 AM   #225
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 26,068
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
There is no pollution. The reactor will be closed and under vacuum. Hydrinos themselves are non-reactive and vent into space since they are lighter than air.


So, if hydrinos are "non-reactive", why has Mills filed multiple patent applications directed to compounds containing hydrinos?

https://www.google.com/patents/US20090123360
https://www.google.com/patents/US20090136853
https://www.google.com/patents/US20090142257


Were you just talking out your ass, or was Mills perpetrating a fraud on the US patent office/US public?
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 11:54 AM   #226
sts60
Master Poster
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,692
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
I said it was possible to navigate around the solar system using celestial navigation and a gross approximation of G, like the one that was taken by Cavendish back in 1798. I'm still struggling to understand how I'm wrong about this. Simply claiming I'm wrong is meaningless.

I don't understand what you are talking about. Measurements of G are all over the place. The Scientific American has done several articles and podcasts about this. I made this claim in reference to G not being proven to be a constant, which it is not. It is simply defined, not empirically proven, to be a constant.
Since the mods already Rule 11'd this, I created a shiny new thread for further discussion. My first question on there is aimed to make sure we have the same idea of "gross approximations" "wide variances", and so on.

Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
There hasn't been an independent deployment of a Tokamak in a commercial role either. So what? How long has the Tokamak project been running for? How many billions have been spent on it again? I guess fusion isn't real either.
Fusion is observed to be real; it occurs commonly in nature, otherwise we wouldn't be here. You claim that hydrinos exist, but the evidence offered for it is very weak, and the idea violates well-established theory. Moreover, as as has already been pointed out, hydrino transitions (if real) should already be observed in nature. They're not. So, unlike fusion, hydrinos are claimed to be real, but not proven to be real. The pet studies you cite like a talisman do not prove their existence, not by a long shot. Any comparison to fusion is irrelevant.
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:00 PM   #227
aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
 
aleCcowaN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 7,566
This thread is wonderful. It seems to be the "let's inflate the stock balloon" version of these ones:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4936780&postcount=1

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=303946

Both videos (the one from REM Source was removed a few weeks later) show the old trick of spinning the device to show its only connexion is some cable loosely hidden below the base.

Do the videos of this impressive energetic breakthrough show the same?
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated, or covfefe your soul!
These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out.
I got tired of the actual schizophrenics that are taking hold part of the forum and decided to do something about it.
aleCcowaN is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:03 PM   #228
michaelsuede
Graduate Poster
 
michaelsuede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,416
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
So, if hydrinos are "non-reactive", why has Mills filed multiple patent applications directed to compounds containing hydrinos?

https://www.google.com/patents/US20090123360
https://www.google.com/patents/US20090136853
https://www.google.com/patents/US20090142257


Were you just talking out your ass, or was Mills perpetrating a fraud on the US patent office/US public?
You can listen to Mills describe collection of the hydrino gas and venting of the gas from the generator between 1:20:00 and 1:23:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhIo...ndex=3&t=4494s

The gas coming off the reactor is nonreactive.
michaelsuede is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:04 PM   #229
sts60
Master Poster
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,692
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
There is no pollution. The reactor will be closed and under vacuum. Hydrinos themselves are non-reactive and vent into space since they are lighter than air...
Question 1: How can they reaction products "vent into space" if the reactor is "closed and under vacuum"?

Question 2: A hydrino is supposed to be a hydrogen atom, just with an electron in a lower orbit than that allowed by a century-plus of quantum mechanical theory and observation. Why should it be non-reactive?

Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
...In the long run, with a fully tuned photovoltaic array along with increased vapor pressure, we could see individual units pumping out megawatt range power.
(Highlighting mine)

Question 3: How can a reactor be "under vacuum" and use an "increased vapor pressure" to increase its efficiency?

(Aside to others: I know, I know - I have some experience with vacuum systems - but I want to see how michaelsuede explains this.)
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:05 PM   #230
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 13,144
Originally Posted by aleCcowaN View Post
Do the videos of this impressive energetic breakthrough show the same?

The ones I've seen so far show close-ups of chambers, with what looks like some kind of arcing electrodes inside (supposedly needed for the hydrino-producing reaction). When started up they emit bright light that saturates the video, and some smoke.
__________________
A zÝmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:13 PM   #231
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,860
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
Bwhahaha! Where do they say that?



Yeah, as you and Aepervius point out, claiming to have created dark matter is a gigantic (and bogus) claim, but claiming to have detected it with their setup at all is ridiculous, and claiming they detected it through spectroscopy is absolutely hilarious. It's like saying, "we created enough antimatter that we were able to put it in a test tube and identify it with color changes in litmus paper".

Ha ha ha! Did they really say that? That's priceless.
Why wouldn't that work? Anti-matter is quantum opposite to matter right? So if it's the opposite then an antimatter acid would change litmus paper to blue! What more proof would be needed?

(I think I am getting the hang of this scamology malarky.)
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:13 PM   #232
phunk
Illuminator
 
phunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,592
Why hasn't the exhaust for this thing been bottled up and sent to anyone for independent investigation. There's a nobel prize just waiting for proof that hydrinos exist.
phunk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:21 PM   #233
RussDill
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Charleston
Posts: 5,405
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
You can listen to Mills describe collection of the hydrino gas and venting of the gas from the generator between 1:20:00 and 1:23:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhIo...ndex=3&t=4494s

The gas coming off the reactor is nonreactive.
How can it be both a gas that can be contained and be dark matter?
__________________
The woods are lovely, dark and deep
but i have promises to keep
and lines to code before I sleep
And lines to code before I sleep
RussDill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:23 PM   #234
sts60
Master Poster
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,692
Originally Posted by RussDill View Post
How can it be both a gas that can be contained and be dark matter?
And how do you identify this hydrino dark matter by spectroscopy? (This ought to be good.)
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:25 PM   #235
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,860
Originally Posted by phunk View Post
Why hasn't the exhaust for this thing been bottled up and sent to anyone for independent investigation. There's a nobel prize just waiting for proof that hydrinos exist.
Or why not simply dunk the output end - where all this heat is created - into a swimming pool and measure the temperature rise.

Hey presto unlimited funding, Nobel prizes galore, freedom of the city - no freedom of the world for this Mills fella. No one will even remember Einstein.

And according to Mills himself he has been able to do this for what 25 years? and it's never occurred to him to do such simple straightforward demonstration?

ETA: It really is the like the psychic who knows the future and can remote view and speak to your poor departed mother but can't give you the winning lottery numbers.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you

Last edited by Darat; 10th January 2017 at 12:26 PM.
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:27 PM   #236
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 26,068
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
You can listen to Mills describe collection of the hydrino gas and venting of the gas from the generator between 1:20:00 and 1:23:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhIo...ndex=3&t=4494s

The gas coming off the reactor is nonreactive.


That's not an answer to the questions I asked.

If this is non-reactive as you assert, then why did he apply for multiple patents on hydrino-containing compounds?

Please explain this discrepancy, or admit that you can't (or won't) explain it.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:27 PM   #237
aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
 
aleCcowaN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 7,566
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
The ones I've seen so far show close-ups of chambers, with what looks like some kind of arcing electrodes inside (supposedly needed for the hydrino-producing reaction). When started up they emit bright light that saturates the video, and some smoke.
Thank you. I can't find a straightforward claim about what they're doing. I read the last of those four "papers" and there's not information about who prepared the samples, and I find nothing but a maybe hidden in laboratory error margins (let's say that copper hydroxide and iron bromide are cheap enough to test masses way above 11 milligrams) . So in light of what you describe about the video's content I'll probably stick to Penn & Teller's Fool Us. It's much more edifying than buying this Brooklyn Bridge.
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated, or covfefe your soul!
These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out.
I got tired of the actual schizophrenics that are taking hold part of the forum and decided to do something about it.
aleCcowaN is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:50 PM   #238
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,812
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
Oh I think it is entirely equivalent.

The ITER team has blown over 14 billion just to make a proof of concept that can't even run over-unity. The ITER was initially formed back in 1985, so that's 32 years ago. So 32 years and 14 billion flushed down the toilet and they don't even have a working proof of concept yet.

Mills has taken half the time with a hundredth of the resources to go from theory to functional reactor, and now on to a functional generator. Yet I don't see you complaining that fusion reactors aren't real. In terms of progress, Mills team makes the ITER team look like a bunch of turtles.
No, there is no doubt at all that fusion reactions have been created both in nature, in stars, and on Earth, in hydrogen bombs and yes, in Tokomak runs.
The science is well documented, explained and has garned Nobel prizes.
.
None of that can be said of the physics of hydrinos despite it being touted by Mills for almost as long as Tokomak has been around.

You are falsely equating development of a machine with the scientific concept.

How long did it take to go from E=mc 2 to the Manhattan project? (Answer ~29 years) How long between Alamogordo and EBR-1 (Answer 4.5 years)

From Rutherford & Einstein to working fission power plant is over 3 decades. Fusion reactors are not available not because the science and concept of fusion is unproven, it's engineering issues such as containment of plasma capable of destroying any physical container.

That said, you haven't answered the question yet.
Given, the claims of Mills at having produced hydrinos, and given the promises of having a production model available for installation in businesses in the next 12 months, if the science is not proven and the generator not available in a year will you harbour doubt? If it's still stalled in development in 5 years from now? 10 years?

Last edited by jaydeehess; 10th January 2017 at 01:01 PM.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:50 PM   #239
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,553
Brilliant Light Power Going To Market - Free Energy Generator

Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
I was thinking the same thing. Atoms don't have to be above their ground states to react chemically, so how reactive is Hydrino or Hydrino2? Does it react with oxygen to form Hydrino2O, and if so, what effect does that have on water contaminated by it? Does it affect metabolic pathways? Does it bio-accumulate? Do even parts-per-trillion concentrations smell strongly of cat vomit? How can it be filtered out? How can it be stored?



The EPA might have something to say about this, but their hands are tied, as long as there's no evidence the stuff actually exists.


Holy crap you're right.

The chemistry of a Hydrino is terrifying. The upper electron orbits might be unaffected but even if they are we're talking about heavier atoms. We can look to the health effects of Heavy Water for comparison:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_water

Yikes!

Then there's the potential impact this could have on the chemistry of molecules containing hydrinos. We're looking at a prion-level biological disruptive agent that isn't restricted to proteins, neurological damage, or species. You think your brain turning into a hole-riddled sponge is bad wait until it happens to every tissue in your body and the bodies of every living thing in the environment. The SWEAT of an infected person would be toxic.

If this isn't a con job, if the science is real, then these people are potentially creating an environmental disaster that will kill off all multi-cellular and most unicellular life on the planet.

Where are the studies on the safety of Hydrinos in biological systems?
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:53 PM   #240
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,553
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
You can listen to Mills describe collection of the hydrino gas and venting of the gas from the generator between 1:20:00 and 1:23:00



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhIo...ndex=3&t=4494s



The gas coming off the reactor is nonreactive.


In other words he's done NO REAL TESTING of this stuff, claims it's dark matter yet somehow inert and is venting it into the frelling atmosphere?

ARE YOU PEOPLE *********** INSANE?
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:36 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.