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

Reply
Old 27th May 2018, 08:40 AM   #201
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by The Man View Post
Wait what?!?! "closed Suncell prototype"?!?! Ain't the "Advanced SunCell® Design" supposed to "operate in air, no sealed chamber required"?
You're not understanding. Now the sealed Suncell can operate in in air, rather than having to be contained in a larger, sealed unit that contained an Argon and Hydrogen atmosphere.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 08:54 AM   #202
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Do you have any idea how utterly stupid the highlighted bit sounds?
Silver melts at 1235 K, it boils at 2435 K. That is about 1200 K in difference.

So, either Mills is incapable of looking up basic physics facts (largely proven by his many 'theories') and thus uses FAR to much power to start his so-called machine, OR his machine produces power in massive excess which he then has failed to in any way capitalize on. Now he has also shown not to know how to turn heat into power, so this would also utter incompetence.

So no matter how you look at him, the man is an incompetent in anything to do with engineering.
Of course it "produces power in massive excess". That's the whole idea. The silver is not just vaporized, it is ionized by the eUV radiation given off by hydrino formation. You think it's a walk in the park to get everything working without something going wrong. It is not. Mills details some of the challenges in his quarterly report.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 08:59 AM   #203
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
I'd like to see the photograph of the laboratory surroundings, all coated in condensed silver vapor. That would be something to see.

I suspect, though, that no such photographs exist, because all the evaporated silver actually re-condensed at the local WE BUY GOLD AND SILVER shop.
I'm sure some fume hoods at BLP will have a silver lining.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 09:09 AM   #204
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 13,317
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Of course I remember the interdigitating gears. That was really the first iteration of the SunCell concept - which involved exploding metal hydrate pellets or slurry on the rotating gear mechanism which carried the high electrical current. It's all still on Youtube. There was no MHD involved then however.

The SunCell environment and mechanism has come a long way since then. Much more elegant.
There doesn't appear to be much if any MHD involved in the purported MHD variant either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet...amic_generator

As usual others have come a longer way in the related field over the decades. Seriously, if you're going to just pick a technology out of a hat at least try not to go with the least efficient and most limited application (Faraday generator) of that technology.

ETA:

Heck, looking at the design again it ain't even a decent Faraday generator. The round electromagnets are going to reduce the length of stable field exposure and if the earlier concept drawing is accurate to the design the conducting electrodes are parallel to not perpendicular to the magnetic field.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ

Last edited by The Man; 27th May 2018 at 09:47 AM. Reason: ETA
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 09:21 AM   #205
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 13,317
Originally Posted by markie View Post
You're not understanding. Now the sealed Suncell can operate in in air, rather than having to be contained in a larger, sealed unit that contained an Argon and Hydrogen atmosphere.
Ah so "no sealed chamber required" except for the, well, "sealed chamber" still required but apparently still not obtained. The lack of understanding sure as heck ain't mine.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 09:27 AM   #206
Red Baron Farms
Illuminator
 
Red Baron Farms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 4,172
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Of course I remember the interdigitating gears. That was really the first iteration of the SunCell concept - which involved exploding metal hydrate pellets or slurry on the rotating gear mechanism which carried the high electrical current. It's all still on Youtube. There was no MHD involved then however.

The SunCell environment and mechanism has come a long way since then. Much more elegant.
Burning metal gets you nowhere because it takes energy to distill/refine the metals to begin with. Thus the elegance you talk about is merely the elegance of hiding the true source of the energy anomaly Mills falsely claims comes from hydrinos.

As stated before, it is nothing more than conjurers tricks and deception. Pure illusion due to you WANTING to believe it is true, and Mills planting a seed to misdirect.

In reality there is no over-unity device period. It is an impossibility. Actually even if hydrinos were real it still couldn't be an over-unity device! (stealing back whatever energy they emitted when they go back to normal hydrogen) So that alone should be proof enough that what Mills described is a hoax. It couldn't possibly work better closed than open. In a closed system even if hydrinos were real it couldn't physically produce over-unity just by recycling reactants. (even under Mills so called new physics)

It was pretty much the nail in the coffin when Mills finally played the over-unity/perpetual motion machine card. Now it is nothing but scorn and derision for anyone still foolish enough to believe the hoax.
__________________
Scott
"Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted & thoughtful observation rather than protracted & thoughtless labour; & of looking at plants & animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system." Bill Mollison
Biome Carbon Cycle Management

Last edited by Red Baron Farms; 27th May 2018 at 11:02 AM.
Red Baron Farms is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 09:54 AM   #207
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,941
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Of course I remember the interdigitating gears. That was really the first iteration of the SunCell concept - which involved exploding metal hydrate pellets or slurry on the rotating gear mechanism which carried the high electrical current. It's all still on Youtube. There was no MHD involved then however.

The SunCell environment and mechanism has come a long way since then. Much more elegant.
Perhaps that's one of his problems, going for elegance rather than working?
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 10:07 AM   #208
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,742
Originally Posted by markie View Post
It's fascinating that supposedly rational skeptics here are entertaining a wider and wilder web of conspiracy theory involving an increasing number of people in an increasingly fantastical scam over time.
You've raised an excellent point! Let's take a look closer. For grand conspiracies such as the moon landing, this is an important criticism because when you add everything up it's simply not plausible. So what about this one?

Here's the question: Is the number of people involved that would have to know it's a scam so large that paying them would require more money than the conspirators have?

For the moon landing, the answer was yes. Faking it would have involved so many people that the whole thing just falls apart. But for this one? I don't think it's an issue. You have the normal number of con artists for a free energy scam, and then as it gets more money and drags on longer you add some more staff - some of which are directly in on it, some probably know but not officially and are just apathetic, and some may be true believers. Then you pay a few actual scientists to say it's legit.

This is all in line with other scams, and would still allow them to operate at a profit.

So that's the 'number of people' part. You also said the scam was "wild" and "fantastical" and so for that part we would need to look at the core claims:

For this to be a conspiracy in the way that has been described, the following would need to be true:

1. Someone is greedy and willing to lie, and can find people to work with him - many of which would also need to be greedy and willing to lie. (So far so good, these people are not in short supply.)

2. That person would need to make up a free energy device that sounds sciency but isn't real. (This happens all the time.)

3. That person would then need to offer up a string of excuses and explanations that would allow them to keep collecting investment money without producing a marketable product. (Nothing wild or fantastical about that.)

4. They would then have to find scientists willing to say the tech is legit. This is really a sub-set of point one above. (Still not a problem, scientists are people too and often underpaid at that.)

That's really it. None of that is wild or fantastical. Now think about what would need to be true for this to NOT be a conspiracy...
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 10:26 AM   #209
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,202
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Of course it "produces power in massive excess". That's the whole idea. The silver is not just vaporized, it is ionized by the eUV radiation given off by hydrino formation. You think it's a walk in the park to get everything working without something going wrong. It is not. Mills details some of the challenges in his quarterly report.
But all those challenges were solved decades ago. They are called nuclear reactors.
So all he would have had to do was buy an engineering book and plug his method in.

Seriously. EVERY challenge Mills claims to run into has been solved so long ago they are engineering solutions now. If not even archaic technology like steam engines.

No skin of my nose, I have no money invested in him, but it's sad to see how those who he has conned keep hoping for 'any moment now'.

Now before you trot out the 'nuclear fusion takes long too', lets not forget we can actually PRODUCE nuclear fusion. You know, independently and by anyone with the money and time. Several craters in the world are proof of that.

Hmmm, looking at that line of thought, why has Mills not militarized his uncontrollable exothermic reaction?
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 11:17 AM   #210
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by Red Baron Farms View Post
Burning metal gets you nowhere because it takes energy to distill/refine the metals to begin with. Thus the elegance you talk about is merely the elegance of hiding the true source of the energy anomaly Mills falsely claims comes from hydrinos.

As stated before, it is nothing more than conjurers tricks and deception. Pure illusion due to you WANTING to believe it is true, and Mills planting a seed to misdirect.

In reality there is no over-unity device period. It is an impossibility. Actually even if hydrinos were real it still couldn't be an over-unity device! (stealing back whatever energy they emitted when they go back to normal hydrogen) So that alone should be proof enough that what Mills described is a hoax. It couldn't possibly work better closed than open. In a closed system even if hydrinos were real it couldn't physically produce over-unity just by recycling reactants. (even under Mills so called new physics)

It was pretty much the nail in the coffin when Mills finally played the over-unity/perpetual motion machine card. Now it is nothing but scorn and derision for anyone still foolish enough to believe the hoax.
Your incorrect assumption is that this is about oxidizing metals. It is not. In fact oxidation has proven a hindrance to the hydrino formation environment.

Of course we are not talking about an over unity device. The SunCell would be no more over unity than an internal combustion engine. But if nature provides hydrocarbons to burn, we take them and extract their potential energy. If nature provides Hydrogen atoms that have not yet fallen below ground state, we take them and extract their potential energy. Simple.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 11:19 AM   #211
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 9,091
Originally Posted by markie View Post
I'm sure some fume hoods at BLP will have a silver lining.
I will say this for Mills, he's much better at running the "perpetual failed product" con than the folks behind Theranos. He knows how to avoid scrutiny by regulatory agencies. He also knows to keep the takes from individual marks small enough to make litigation to recover the funds more expensive than walking away.

What did Theranos in was massive, multi-million dollar deals that would inevitably expose the fact that they didn't have a working product, while attracting the attention of government regulatory agencies. Mills is going on 30 years with his more modest version of the con, while Elizabeth Holmes didn't make it to 15.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 11:27 AM   #212
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
You've raised an excellent point! Let's take a look closer. For grand conspiracies such as the moon landing, this is an important criticism because when you add everything up it's simply not plausible. So what about this one?

Here's the question: Is the number of people involved that would have to know it's a scam so large that paying them would require more money than the conspirators have?

For the moon landing, the answer was yes. Faking it would have involved so many people that the whole thing just falls apart. But for this one? I don't think it's an issue. You have the normal number of con artists for a free energy scam, and then as it gets more money and drags on longer you add some more staff - some of which are directly in on it, some probably know but not officially and are just apathetic, and some may be true believers. Then you pay a few actual scientists to say it's legit.

This is all in line with other scams, and would still allow them to operate at a profit.

So that's the 'number of people' part. You also said the scam was "wild" and "fantastical" and so for that part we would need to look at the core claims:

For this to be a conspiracy in the way that has been described, the following would need to be true:

1. Someone is greedy and willing to lie, and can find people to work with him - many of which would also need to be greedy and willing to lie. (So far so good, these people are not in short supply.)

2. That person would need to make up a free energy device that sounds sciency but isn't real. (This happens all the time.)

3. That person would then need to offer up a string of excuses and explanations that would allow them to keep collecting investment money without producing a marketable product. (Nothing wild or fantastical about that.)

4. They would then have to find scientists willing to say the tech is legit. This is really a sub-set of point one above. (Still not a problem, scientists are people too and often underpaid at that.)

That's really it. None of that is wild or fantastical. Now think about what would need to be true for this to NOT be a conspiracy...
So cozy and comfy talking in the abstract. Look at the history. Look at the profiles of the people involved. These are real people and scientists here, which you so glibly infer are morally corrupt and bought off to tell lies. Get a ethical grip man.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 11:45 AM   #213
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
But all those challenges were solved decades ago. They are called nuclear reactors.
So all he would have had to do was buy an engineering book and plug his method in.

Seriously. EVERY challenge Mills claims to run into has been solved so long ago they are engineering solutions now. If not even archaic technology like steam engines.

No skin of my nose, I have no money invested in him, but it's sad to see how those who he has conned keep hoping for 'any moment now'.

Now before you trot out the 'nuclear fusion takes long too', lets not forget we can actually PRODUCE nuclear fusion. You know, independently and by anyone with the money and time. Several craters in the world are proof of that.

Hmmm, looking at that line of thought, why has Mills not militarized his uncontrollable exothermic reaction?
Uncontrollable exothermic reaction? Hardly. The reaction is easily quenched. Militarization of the hydrino reaction will be very difficult.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 12:26 PM   #214
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,151
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Mills has achieved excess energy - sometimes for months - with earlier cells over the last 20 years, but bluntly put they were not good enough for the marketplace.
A device that fits in the back of a truck and produces energy for months at a time would be extremely useful to the military. Deploy them to forward bases to charge all the electronics that modern soldiers have to carry.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 12:48 PM   #215
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,151
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Uncontrollable exothermic reaction? Hardly. The reaction is easily quenched. Militarization of the hydrino reaction will be very difficult.
Why not just license the basic patents to the Navy, and let them figure out how to build a powerplant around the reaction? Unbeatable revenue stream, right there.

And that's just the beginning. Once the Navy has figured it out, and the powerplant technology is on the civilian market, there'll be no shortage of customers looking to license Mills' patents and build their own Navy engines.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 12:51 PM   #216
jrhowell
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 522
Quote:
We have been focused on a much more advanced design that has the capacity to generate arbitrarily high power with much less complex systems that should have a significant impact on the time to commercialization.
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Militarization of the hydrino reaction will be very difficult.
Who is right here? I would say neither!
jrhowell 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 01:08 PM   #217
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,202
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Uncontrollable exothermic reaction? Hardly. The reaction is easily quenched. Militarization of the hydrino reaction will be very difficult.
So then it should not vaporize silver and be very easy to use to create power.

So your previous comment about how hard that is and how much engineering is needed was a lie (by either you or Mills).
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 01:09 PM   #218
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
A device that fits in the back of a truck and produces energy for months at a time would be extremely useful to the military. Deploy them to forward bases to charge all the electronics that modern soldiers have to carry.
Problem is that a large CIHT cell from around 2012 could only net out about one hundred watts if I recall rightly. Mills thought they could tweak the process to get much more power, but oxidation issues from higher voltages (as I recall) thwarted their plans. Outdone by a large solar panel.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 01:16 PM   #219
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Why not just license the basic patents to the Navy, and let them figure out how to build a powerplant around the reaction? Unbeatable revenue stream, right there.

And that's just the beginning. Once the Navy has figured it out, and the powerplant technology is on the civilian market, there'll be no shortage of customers looking to license Mills' patents and build their own Navy engines.
Very early on, early 1990s, Mills did licence over a patent to ThermaCore. As I recall it involved heated copper tubes through which H2 gas was bubbled. Produced excess energy, but Thermacore was unable to develop it further to increase the power density and thus make it marketable.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 01:50 PM   #220
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,900
Originally Posted by markie View Post
So cozy and comfy talking in the abstract. Look at the history.
OK

... nothing in relevant, peer-reviewed journals, of the "independent verification" kind.

... ~30 years of promises of working/commercial/whatever devices within mere months.

... no dramatic breakthroughs in cancer treatments, despite promises.

...

Quote:
Look at the profiles of the people involved. These are real people and scientists here, which you so glibly infer are morally corrupt and bought off to tell lies. Get a ethical grip man.
Hilite added.

Doesn't look glib to me.

And the fact that none of the scientists have yet been awarded any Nobel Prizes says rather a lot about their scientific creds, wouldn't you say?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 03:10 PM   #221
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,742
Originally Posted by markie View Post
So cozy and comfy talking in the abstract.
You said that, as these things go, the claim that this is a scam was "wild" and "increasingly fantastical". I was just pointing out that quite to the contrary it doesn't involve anything implausible. This requires talking about it in the abstract because I'm not actually evaluating it to determine if this particular case is a scam, just to see if that claim is "wild" or "fantastical".

You implied that these claims make them bad skeptics, but I'm just here trying to do what any good skeptic should do - objectively assess the situation. This seems to offend you.

Originally Posted by markie View Post
Look at the history.
Okay cool, we can do that. Do they have a history of bringing things to market successfully? Because that would be points in their favor and would make claims of a scam way less plausible. Do they have a history of delays and problems and missed deadlines? Because that would match what known scams have done and so would make a scam more plausible.

Originally Posted by markie View Post
Look at the profiles of the people involved. These are real people and scientists here, which you so glibly infer are morally corrupt and bought off to tell lies.
I'm saying it's not "wild" or "fantastical" to suggest that someone could be paid to endorse something even if they know it's not real or not good. It happens all the time. Do you think it doesn't?

Originally Posted by markie View Post
Get a ethical grip man.
I think it's funny that you're saying I'm being unethical just because I said sometimes people do dishonest things for money.
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 03:19 PM   #222
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 22,627
Thumbs down Ramanujachary advertising BLP is not evidence of hydrino signatures

Originally Posted by markie View Post
RC: This is what I have in mind.
This is what I pointed out:
25 May 2018 markie: A lie about "hydrino signatures" over years of experiments by Prof Ramanujachary at Rowan University.
25 May 2018 markie: A lie that Prof Ramanujachary did independent experiments [detecting those "hydrino signatures"].

If Ramanujachary were confident about having real evidence of the existence of hydrinos then he would have published his work in a scientific journal. Instead we have "verification reports" used as ads for BLP products that have never got to market.

There are no "hydrino signatures" in "Synthesis and Characterization Alkali Metal Salts Containing Trapped Hydrino" (2009). That would be signatures that could only be produced by hydrinos.
The text has "BLP attributes" and "BLP has made claims". The actual results were NMR results similar to those reported by BLP + neutron diffraction studies that indicate the possibility of trapped unknown atoms.
Perhaps more importantly you are confirming the "over years of experiments" part of your lie - 2009 is not 2018!

28 May 2018 markie: Ramanujachary advertising BLP is not evidence of hydrino signatures or his years of independent experiments.
What that advertising is evidence of is gullibility since he should have known about the physical impossibility of hydrinos, years of failure and the deluded book by Mills.

Last edited by Reality Check; 27th May 2018 at 03:43 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 03:49 PM   #223
WhatRoughBeast
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,312
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Of course I remember the interdigitating gears. That was really the first iteration of the SunCell concept - which involved exploding metal hydrate pellets or slurry on the rotating gear mechanism which carried the high electrical current. It's all still on Youtube. There was no MHD involved then however.
Markie, listen up. Despite your hopeful assertions that "there was no MHD involved", YES THERE BLOODY WELL WAS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvcCzttXr5k A January 2014 Mills interview.

14:30 to 15:10. MHD in the graphics and "MagnetoHydrodynamics" in the speech. By Mills.

MHD was central to that version of the show, and Mills produced at least one research paper on the subject.

So let's have no more ex post facto historical editing.

Although I will admit that my memory was faulty: the claim was not a megawatt in a cubic meter - it was 10 megawatts in a square foot. Whatever that means.

Last edited by WhatRoughBeast; 27th May 2018 at 03:53 PM.
WhatRoughBeast is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 04:28 PM   #224
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by WhatRoughBeast View Post
Markie, listen up. Despite your hopeful assertions that "there was no MHD involved", YES THERE BLOODY WELL WAS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvcCzttXr5k A January 2014 Mills interview.

14:30 to 15:10. MHD in the graphics and "MagnetoHydrodynamics" in the speech. By Mills.

MHD was central to that version of the show, and Mills produced at least one research paper on the subject.

So let's have no more ex post facto historical editing.

Although I will admit that my memory was faulty: the claim was not a megawatt in a cubic meter - it was 10 megawatts in a square foot. Whatever that means.
Right you are, my apologies. For a brief while at the very beginning of the Suncell type of reaction Mills did consider MHD to harness the energy of moving ions from the energetic explosion. Then he changed track and went to photovoltaics because with further analysis he realized most of the energy release was photonic, not kinetic. (I talked about this in an earlier post but had a memory lapse.) Now he's going back to MHD, but in a different way.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 04:31 PM   #225
Red Baron Farms
Illuminator
 
Red Baron Farms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 4,172
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Your incorrect assumption is that this is about oxidizing metals. It is not. In fact oxidation has proven a hindrance to the hydrino formation environment.

Of course we are not talking about an over unity device. The SunCell would be no more over unity than an internal combustion engine. But if nature provides hydrocarbons to burn, we take them and extract their potential energy. If nature provides Hydrogen atoms that have not yet fallen below ground state, we take them and extract their potential energy. Simple.
Hahahah playing both sides now? First proclaiming how elegant it would be to close the system. (which makes it an over-unity devise), then when anyone points out that makes it impossible, you immediately backtrack and pretend you never made those claims!

You are correct about one thing though. The sun cell is no more over-unity than ICE. The primary difference being the fuel used. Mills is burning metals with water. Something that few people know even exists, but a thing all Marine engineers must learn to get licensed. (we know about welding too so the re-purposed welding machine doesn't fool us for a second either.) And we are even taught about hydrogen embrittlement of metals, something not commonly known either.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0816114831.htm

So when Mills starts attributing ordinary processes and reactions to a mythical hydrino, it might fool some few people, but there are plenty more like myself who laugh at the childish misdirection.

Hocus pocus mumbo jumbo. Or as someone else pointed out, technobabble worthy of Star Trek, but certainly not real science.
__________________
Scott
"Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted & thoughtful observation rather than protracted & thoughtless labour; & of looking at plants & animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system." Bill Mollison
Biome Carbon Cycle Management

Last edited by Red Baron Farms; 27th May 2018 at 04:32 PM.
Red Baron Farms is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 04:37 PM   #226
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
This is what I pointed out:
25 May 2018 markie: A lie about "hydrino signatures" over years of experiments by Prof Ramanujachary at Rowan University.
25 May 2018 markie: A lie that Prof Ramanujachary did independent experiments [detecting those "hydrino signatures"].

If Ramanujachary were confident about having real evidence of the existence of hydrinos then he would have published his work in a scientific journal. Instead we have "verification reports" used as ads for BLP products that have never got to market.

There are no "hydrino signatures" in "Synthesis and Characterization Alkali Metal Salts Containing Trapped Hydrino" (2009). That would be signatures that could only be produced by hydrinos.
The text has "BLP attributes" and "BLP has made claims". The actual results were NMR results similar to those reported by BLP + neutron diffraction studies that indicate the possibility of trapped unknown atoms.
Perhaps more importantly you are confirming the "over years of experiments" part of your lie - 2009 is not 2018!

28 May 2018 markie: Ramanujachary advertising BLP is not evidence of hydrino signatures or his years of independent experiments.
What that advertising is evidence of is gullibility since he should have known about the physical impossibility of hydrinos, years of failure and the deluded book by Mills.
To repeat: it is not Chary's place to claim they are hydrinos. He is claiming that the results are consistent with Mills hydrino theory, and that there are no known compounds in the literature that produce those kinds of results. Frankly I'm surprised you don't get this by now.

If you think Rowan worked on this only in 2009, you are mistaken. They've worked on this for years.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 05:01 PM   #227
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by Red Baron Farms View Post
Hahahah playing both sides now? First proclaiming how elegant it would be to close the system. (which makes it an over-unity devise), then when anyone points out that makes it impossible, you immediately backtrack and pretend you never made those claims!

You are correct about one thing though. The sun cell is no more over-unity than ICE. The primary difference being the fuel used. Mills is burning metals with water. Something that few people know even exists, but a thing all Marine engineers must learn to get licensed. (we know about welding too so the re-purposed welding machine doesn't fool us for a second either.) And we are even taught about hydrogen embrittlement of metals, something not commonly known either.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0816114831.htm

So when Mills starts attributing ordinary processes and reactions to a mythical hydrino, it might fool some few people, but there are plenty more like myself who laugh at the childish misdirection.

Hocus pocus mumbo jumbo. Or as someone else pointed out, technobabble worthy of Star Trek, but certainly not real science.
By a closed system, of course I mean that the silver and the catalyst is all retained and recycled within the sealed vessel, rather than vented out. It doesn't mean that hydrogen is not added as fuel!

Too much water quenches the reaction btw. In fact they don't use water directly anymore.

Hydrogen embrittlement? You keep bringing that up, but I fail to see your point.
Elaborate if you wish.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 06:42 PM   #228
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 22,627
Thumbs down A "consistent with Mills hydrino theory" lie

Originally Posted by markie View Post
He is claiming that the results are consistent with Mills hydrino theory,
28 May 2018 markie: A "consistent with Mills hydrino theory" lie.
The validation report has "consistent with BLP NMR results". Mills does not have a theory - he has ignorant delusions. Those delusions are described in the report. Various BLP fantasies are mentioned. I do not recall amy prediction from Mills delusions about NMR results in his book.

28 May 2018 markie: Repeating a "They've worked on this for years" lie does not make it true.
The evidence that you have given is that Ramanujachary has not run independent experiments over years resulting in "hydrino signatures". The closest was one set of 2009 reports consistent with BLP NMR results. Nothing unique to Mills delusions.

25 May 2018 markie: A lie about "hydrino signatures" over years of experiments by Prof Ramanujachary at Rowan University.
25 May 2018 markie: A lie that Prof Ramanujachary did independent experiments [detecting those "hydrino signatures"].
28 May 2018 markie: Ramanujachary advertising BLP is not evidence of hydrino signatures or his years of independent experiments.

Many items of ignorance, delusions and lies in Mills book and a paper

Items of ignorance and some lies from markie from his blind faith in Mills.
This includes 25 July 2017 markie: The "same" spectra + the continuum spectra are another different example of Mills incompetence, delusion or lying and the 2012 paper
Interpretation of EUV emissions observed by Mills et al.
Quote:
An explanation of the so-called hydrino continuum emissions proposed by Mills and Lu, most recently in [Eur. Phys. J. D 64, 65 (2011)], is presented using conventional atomic, plasma, and discharge physics. It is argued that the observed EUV emissions during their pulsed discharges originate from transitions in ions sputtered or evaporated from the electrodes. Such an interpretation removes their justification for the introduction of hydrino particles.
If Mills delusions do not have EUV emissions then NMR results are at least dubious.

Last edited by Reality Check; 27th May 2018 at 06:58 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 08:07 PM   #229
WhatRoughBeast
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,312
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Right you are, my apologies.
Accepted.

Quote:
For a brief while at the very beginning of the Suncell type of reaction Mills did consider MHD to harness the energy of moving ions from the energetic explosion. Then he changed track and went to photovoltaics because with further analysis he realized most of the energy release was photonic, not kinetic.
This has two problems. First, you (like Mills) have glided serenely over the issue of why the approach didn't work in the first place, and instead the approach went into the Memory Hole while the new, improved, SunCell reactor took the stage. Sticking to the "gear wheel" model, your statement indicates a dual exercise of incompetence.

1) He didn't do the basic analysis to determine where the power was, but went with what seemed cool. He did models, gave interviews, even submitted a patent application - all based on his own lack of competence in analyzing the most basic aspects of the process.

2) He then went went with a "photonic" approach which makes even less sense than MHD. If photonic power conversion were to be tried directly, impingement of supersonic metal vapor on the conversion cells would get an opaque layer within seconds. Did Mills realize this? Apparently not. If you can find a quote by Mills which does deal with this, I stand corrected. But not until.

Is this sort of debacle supposed to be impressive (in a good way)?

Quote:
Now he's going back to MHD, but in a different way.
Different how?
WhatRoughBeast is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 09:53 PM   #230
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,656
Originally Posted by WhatRoughBeast View Post
Different how?
It will require a massive amount of money, at least twice as much as before, to achieve....nothing, again.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 10:00 PM   #231
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,656
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Militarization of the hydrino reaction will be very difficult.
Do you think making an authoritative statement about an imaginary thing you know nothing about is plausible? Really? LOL
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 10:03 PM   #232
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,656
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Look at the history.
We have it clearly says SCAM

Quote:
Look at the profiles of the people involved.
Mills delusions on paper and in book point to SCAM

Quote:
Get a ethical grip man.
Good advice you might want to consider doing it yourself shilling for a scam is not ethical.

Last edited by Hans; 27th May 2018 at 10:07 PM.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 10:05 PM   #233
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,656
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Of course it "produces power in massive excess". That's the whole idea. The silver is not just vaporized, it is ionized by the eUV radiation given off by hydrino formation. You think it's a walk in the park to get everything working without something going wrong. It is not. Mills details some of the challenges in his quarterly report.
Yet five years from now you'll be pretending this was 'progress'.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 10:06 PM   #234
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,656
Originally Posted by markie View Post

The SunCell environment and mechanism has come a long way since then. Much more elegant.
...................elegance in not working you mean? I believe the appropriate word for that is 'nonfunctional crap'?
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 01:51 AM   #235
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 21,996
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Mills has demonstrated many hydrino reaction environments over the years. None has met the threshold of achieving true prototype status, meaning something that could be seriously considered as a preproduction model for the marketplace.
In all cases but one before the Suncell they did not have sufficient power density to make it worthwhile. Big size, low power. In one case they had the power density but the reactants could not be reliably recycled, so the reaction could not be sustained for a reasonable length of time.
You didn't answer my question.

I'll take your answer to mean that you will count unverified self-reporting and/or ambiguous YouTube videos as him having "demonstrated" his claims to be true.

Quote:
This time they have the power density and, presumably, long term running capacity. A true test of the latter still awaits a closed system. They've had it running for half and hour at high power, but the system was not closed; silver vapour was actively vented out until the molten silver ran dry as I understand it.
You didn't answer either of my questions.

Why did Mills claim his previous models were ready for the marketplace if they weren't? What makes you believe him this time when he makes the same claim?
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 05:19 AM   #236
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,900
Originally Posted by markie View Post
To repeat: it is not Chary's place to claim they are hydrinos. He is claiming that the results are consistent with Mills hydrino theory, and that there are no known compounds in the literature that produce those kinds of results. Frankly I'm surprised you don't get this by now.

If you think Rowan worked on this only in 2009, you are mistaken. They've worked on this for years.
And yet no Nobel Prize?

What goes through the mind of a competent scientist who realizes they have, in their own labs, all but proven a revolution in physics, the kind which comes once a century or three? And who then does nothing, for many years? What does he (they’re all he’s) tell his family and friends who ask him about his work? What about his colleagues, who do research in the same labs? His students?

In ten+ years, not a single person among these hundreds has been curious enough to do their own investigation, with a near certainty of being able to get a significant part of the fame and fortune which would inevitably follow from alerting the world to such an incredible revolution, possibly a Nobel?

Maybe someone could get a Nobel by studying and reporting on the incredible psychological characteristics of such amazing scientists!

Last edited by JeanTate; 28th May 2018 at 05:20 AM.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 05:47 AM   #237
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 13,317
Originally Posted by markie View Post
By a closed system, of course I mean that the silver and the catalyst is all retained and recycled within the sealed vessel, rather than vented out. It doesn't mean that hydrogen is not added as fuel!

Too much water quenches the reaction btw. In fact they don't use water directly anymore.

Hydrogen embrittlement? You keep bringing that up, but I fail to see your point.
Elaborate if you wish.
Unless water is no longer the catalyst, then yes they still use "water directly" as that catalyst. Particularity if still putting it into the silver first, where it wasn't before.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 06:14 AM   #238
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 26,693
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Right you are, my apologies. For a brief while at the very beginning of the Suncell type of reaction Mills did consider MHD to harness the energy of moving ions from the energetic explosion. Then he changed track and went to photovoltaics because with further analysis he realized most of the energy release was photonic, not kinetic. (I talked about this in an earlier post but had a memory lapse.) Now he's going back to MHD, but in a different way.

I just figured it out! Mills is the reincarnation of Admiral Nagumo! The man can't decide what he wants to do, so he keeps changing his mind, and ends up not actually doing anything at all!
__________________
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 offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 06:23 AM   #239
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
28 May 2018 markie: A "consistent with Mills hydrino theory" lie.
The validation report has "consistent with BLP NMR results". Mills does not have a theory - he has ignorant delusions. Those delusions are described in the report. Various BLP fantasies are mentioned. I do not recall amy prediction from Mills delusions about NMR results in his book.

28 May 2018 markie: Repeating a "They've worked on this for years" lie does not make it true.
The evidence that you have given is that Ramanujachary has not run independent experiments over years resulting in "hydrino signatures". The closest was one set of 2009 reports consistent with BLP NMR results. Nothing unique to Mills delusions.

25 May 2018 markie: A lie about "hydrino signatures" over years of experiments by Prof Ramanujachary at Rowan University.
25 May 2018 markie: A lie that Prof Ramanujachary did independent experiments [detecting those "hydrino signatures"].
28 May 2018 markie: Ramanujachary advertising BLP is not evidence of hydrino signatures or his years of independent experiments.

Many items of ignorance, delusions and lies in Mills book and a paper

Items of ignorance and some lies from markie from his blind faith in Mills.
This includes 25 July 2017 markie: The "same" spectra + the continuum spectra are another different example of Mills incompetence, delusion or lying and the 2012 paper
Interpretation of EUV emissions observed by Mills et al.

If Mills delusions do not have EUV emissions then NMR results are at least dubious.

You could always read a more recent experiment by Mills et al at
https://www.brilliantlightpower.com/...ism-051817.pdf

Page 8:
Quote:
The electron-beam triggered a high voltage pulsed discharge at a repetition rate of 5 Hz. The discharge was also self-triggered to determine the influence of the electron-beam on the spectral emission, and the electron-beam triggered repetition rate was varied between 1 Hz and 5 Hz to determine if the electrode metal was the source of the continuum by varying the electrode temperature and vaporization rate.
Spoiler alert: the continuum had little to do with the vaporization rate of the electrode metal, just another way of dispatching Phelp's theory that the 'quasi' continuum was there as a result of high Z electrode sputtering rather than hydrino formation.

So Mills' and others results from: eUV spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction, Mossbauer spectroscopy, time of flight secondary ion mass spectroscopy, electrospray-ionization-time-of-flight-mass-spectroscopy, , Raman spectroscopy, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and various calorimetric studies are quite good thank you.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 06:38 AM   #240
markie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by WhatRoughBeast View Post
Accepted.



This has two problems. First, you (like Mills) have glided serenely over the issue of why the approach didn't work in the first place, and instead the approach went into the Memory Hole while the new, improved, SunCell reactor took the stage. Sticking to the "gear wheel" model, your statement indicates a dual exercise of incompetence.

1) He didn't do the basic analysis to determine where the power was, but went with what seemed cool. He did models, gave interviews, even submitted a patent application - all based on his own lack of competence in analyzing the most basic aspects of the process.

2) He then went went with a "photonic" approach which makes even less sense than MHD. If photonic power conversion were to be tried directly, impingement of supersonic metal vapor on the conversion cells would get an opaque layer within seconds. Did Mills realize this? Apparently not. If you can find a quote by Mills which does deal with this, I stand corrected. But not until.

Is this sort of debacle supposed to be impressive (in a good way)?



Different how?
You have hardly read the experiments, and yet you what to know the juicy details of why Mills didn't pursue MDH originally and went the photovoltaic route, and then back again? Please. Both approaches have their merits and drawbacks. You're treating it in a binary way.

Of course Mills was painfully aware of vapour deposition on photovoltaics. That's why he would enclose the reaction with its vapours in a dome, which would blackbody radiate.

About Mills plans on the current MHD design, I have only read hints that it's a novel departure from the typical implementation.
markie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

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 03:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.