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 Today, 08:04 AM   #3321
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 16,043
What is perhaps interesting is that the BLP press release that quotes those three scientists has this to say:

Quote:
This significant disclosure by BLP makes it readily possible for other laboratories to demonstrate the repeatability of these reactions that produce anomalous heat regularly in our university laboratory.
So it seems that, as of this press release, there is no impediment to truly independent laboratories replicating Mills' experiments faithfully. Furthermore, this Physics Stack Exchange question suggests that BLP actually published a paper on their website* which described the process with enough information for it to be replicated by anybody, although that paper has since vanished - either in 2010, or in 2015, which are the two years in which the question was posted and edited.

*In as much as that can be said to be "publishing" when it comes to a scientific paper
__________________
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 Today, 08:11 AM   #3322
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 19,048
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
What is perhaps interesting is that the BLP press release that quotes those three scientists has this to say:



So it seems that, as of this press release, there is no impediment to truly independent laboratories replicating Mills' experiments faithfully. Furthermore, this Physics Stack Exchange question suggests that BLP actually published a paper on their website* which described the process with enough information for it to be replicated by anybody, although that paper has since vanished - either in 2010, or in 2015, which are the two years in which the question was posted and edited.

*In as much as that can be said to be "publishing" when it comes to a scientific paper
Yes, BLP did make the claim that anyone could replicate it, and they did have the formulas and process available.

The info is no longer readily available as far as I can tell. You can probably find it if you make the effort.

Evidently people still couldn't replicate anything even given the process and formulas.

No one independent of Mills has ever reported any success as far as I know.

Now Mills will claim it was all removed to protect his IP.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 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 Today, 08:47 AM   #3323
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 7,247
Originally Posted by markie View Post
When I say "protecting the IP" I really mean protecting the value of the IP, and that means protecting commercial interests and protecting the value of the time, energy and financial investments put into BLP by BLP staff, board members and investors.

Read Harvard University's justification of why they enforce their patents:

https://www.harvard.edu/media-relati...nt-enforcement

BLP has the added obligation to protect the value of the investments made by their investors.
The value the investments is a lot like the hydrino, in that both are clearly non-exsistant.
CORed 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 Today, 09:05 AM   #3324
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 12,052
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Almost there. An unstable energy state below the ground state of hydrogen is not a hydrino state. It is a very short lived transition state. The electron quickly drops from that state to a lower, stable, hydrino state, emitting continuum radiation in the process.
Nope, still a load of self-contradictory crap, "a multiple of 27.2 eV" below ground state are explicitly Mills hydrino states. Again, do please let us know when you can at least agree with just yourself.
__________________
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 Today, 09:51 AM   #3325
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,413
Originally Posted by markie View Post
The teacher continues to provide questions for the test.

If you doubt what I say about Rowan as found here:

http://brilliantlightpower.com/news-...ugust-12-2009/

feel free to contact Dr. Ramanujachary at Rowan.

Mills will win a Nobel, but like many Nobel winners it will take time.
Nice non-answer to my first question; rather odd mis-direction re the second.

I find it odd that you are, so often, unable to provide straight answers to questions your posts, collectively, strongly imply you should be able to (certainly not limited to my questions!) Why is that?
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 Today, 10:09 AM   #3326
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,413
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
I don't really have the time to pursue this myself at the moment, but both Dr. Jansson and Dr. Ramanujachary are public figures who are easily contactable. Both Dr. Jansson's academic profile and the faculty list for Rowan University have relevant contact details for both. [Edit]This page also has contact details for Dr. Mugweru[/edit].

It might be worth someone contacting one or both to see what they have to say on the matter, outside of a press release authored by BLP.
Yes, there’s lots of things which an inquisitive journalist would find easy to follow, and so write a good expose. Including some possibly awkward questions about the use of university facilities (e.g. did BLP pay them for the analyses? Why were the results not written up and submitted for publication? Is what Dr R did consistent with the university’s charter?). There are also all sorts of good questions which could be asked of various NJ and county government departments.

If I were an investor of old, I’d certainly be doing some digging (this many years with absolutely nothing?) And many ISF members have the abilities and capabilities to do such digging (including me). However, for me this whole BLP/hydrinos thing is so obviously nonsense (if not a scam), and as I t’s got essentially no airtime except here, that I can’t be bothered ... life is too short, and there are far more interesting things to do ...

But, as I’ve said repeatedly, this would change when I can get, from BLP, something to replace the engine in my Hilux ute, something which runs on water (or H) only.
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 Today, 10:12 AM   #3327
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,413
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Win a Nobel for what?
Economics?

One can easily imagine Mills turning his undoubted intellectual firepower to researching and then publishing a ground-breaking paper on the micro-economics of scams.
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 Today, 10:14 AM   #3328
markie
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by The Man View Post
Nope, still a load of self-contradictory crap, "a multiple of 27.2 eV" below ground state are explicitly Mills hydrino states. Again, do please let us know when you can at least agree with just yourself.
That is incorrect. A hydrino state is a certain multiple of 13.6 eV below the hydrogen ground state. Specifically it is [(1+m)^2 - 1^2] * 13.6eV below the ground state, where 2m*13.6eV is the energy removed from ground state hydrogen by a catalyst by non photonic, resonant energy transfer. (m is an integer.)

[(1+m)^2 - 1^2] * 13.6eV = (m^2 + 2m)* 13.6eV = energy difference between hydrogen ground state and a certain hydrino energy state.

The energy left after the resonant energy transfer is

(m^2 + 2m)* 13.6eV - 2m*13.6eV = m^2 * 13.6eV

This is the amount of energy emitted in the form of continuum radiation as the electron falls to the hydrino state. If it is released as one photon it is a photon of energy m^2 * 13.6 eV ; But far more often the energy is released as multiple photons totalling m^2 * 13.6eV. So it looks like continuum radiation with a m^2 * 13.6 eV = (91.2 / m^2) nanometer wavelength lower cutoff. This is supported by experimental evidence. m can be 1,2,3,4, etc depending on the catalyst.
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 Today, 10:24 AM   #3329
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,413
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
Yes, BLP did make the claim that anyone could replicate it, and they did have the formulas and process available.

The info is no longer readily available as far as I can tell. You can probably find it if you make the effort.

Evidently people still couldn't replicate anything even given the process and formulas.

No one independent of Mills has ever reported any success as far as I know.

Now Mills will claim it was all removed to protect his IP.
What’s odd - or not - is that there seems to have an initial flurry of interest, in both Mills’ theory and his experiments, but now there’s nothing.

Pace markie, the fact that Mills has chosen to not lay the groundwork for a Nobel does not seem to have motivated anyone with the ability to pursue these ideas, and so win a Nobel themselves. Surely almost everyone who’s posted to this thread does not find anything odd here (why do anything about hydrinos when they so obviously do not exist? to make a quick summary); perhaps the only real question is why is markie still so fervently promoting BLP?
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 Today, 10:33 AM   #3330
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,413
Originally Posted by markie View Post
That is incorrect. A hydrino state is a certain multiple of 13.6 eV below the hydrogen ground state. Specifically it is [(1+m)^2 - 1^2] * 13.6eV below the ground state, where 2m*13.6eV is the energy removed from ground state hydrogen by a catalyst by non photonic, resonant energy transfer. (m is an integer.)

[(1+m)^2 - 1^2] * 13.6eV = (m^2 + 2m)* 13.6eV = energy difference between hydrogen ground state and a certain hydrino energy state.

The energy left after the resonant energy transfer is

(m^2 + 2m)* 13.6eV - 2m*13.6eV = m^2 * 13.6eV

This is the amount of energy emitted in the form of continuum radiation as the electron falls to the hydrino state. If it is released as one photon it is a photon of energy m^2 * 13.6 eV ; But far more often the energy is released as multiple photons totalling m^2 * 13.6eV. So it looks like continuum radiation with a m^2 * 13.6 eV = (91.2 / m^2) nanometer wavelength lower cutoff. This is supported by experimental evidence. m can be 1,2,3,4, etc depending on the catalyst.
If there were a prize for voodoo physics, you’d be a strong contender, markie!

If there are “multiple photons”, there must be multiple states; if continuum radiation results, there must be an infinite number of such states.

You really should take the advice to stop digging.

Oh, and there is zero experimental evidence, of the independent kind ... voodoo experiments anyone?
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 Today, 12:04 PM   #3331
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 12,052
Originally Posted by markie View Post
That is incorrect. A hydrino state is a certain multiple of 13.6 eV below the hydrogen ground state. Specifically it is [(1+m)^2 - 1^2] * 13.6eV below the ground state, where 2m*13.6eV is the energy removed from ground state hydrogen by a catalyst by non photonic, resonant energy transfer. (m is an integer.)

[(1+m)^2 - 1^2] * 13.6eV = (m^2 + 2m)* 13.6eV = energy difference between hydrogen ground state and a certain hydrino energy state.

The energy left after the resonant energy transfer is

(m^2 + 2m)* 13.6eV - 2m*13.6eV = m^2 * 13.6eV

This is the amount of energy emitted in the form of continuum radiation as the electron falls to the hydrino state. If it is released as one photon it is a photon of energy m^2 * 13.6 eV ; But far more often the energy is released as multiple photons totalling m^2 * 13.6eV. So it looks like continuum radiation with a m^2 * 13.6 eV = (91.2 / m^2) nanometer wavelength lower cutoff. This is supported by experimental evidence. m can be 1,2,3,4, etc depending on the catalyst.
See, there you go, now that's giving it the old college try. Unfortunately, it still doesn't help you or Mills.


Let's see, at m=2 the hydrino state would be 8*13.6eV

And at m=4 the state after just the "non photonic, resonant energy transfer." is...

come on you can guess...

that's right 8*13.6eV, a hydrino state.

Not that those numbers matter much anyway with the ionization energy of water at about 12.6eV. So the water is ionized even before, well, m=0.5 (13.6eV) and as you assert "While it remains ionized, it cannot act as a catalyst. "

http://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cg...Ion-Energetics

So yes, the "multiple of 27.2 eV" below ground state are explicitly Mills hydrino states." assertion was evidently incorrect while the load of self-contradictory crap assessment still remains, as evidently, correct.

I now recommend that you do the math and stop digging.
__________________
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 Today, 12:40 PM   #3332
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,288
markie: Parrots Mills delusions that there are hydrinos with magical states

Originally Posted by markie View Post
An unstable energy state below the ground state of hydrogen is not a hydrino state.
Parroting Mills delusions yet again
17 October 2017 markie: Parrots Mills delusions that there are hydrinos with magical states.

Originally Posted by markie View Post
The electron quickly drops from that state to a lower, stable, hydrino state, emitting continuum radiation in the process.
17 October 2017 markie: A repeated ignorant delusion (from Mills?) that an electron transition produces continuum radiation.
An electron transition between any energy states (including Mills and your delusions about hydrino states), always produces a photon with a single energy. We get continuum radiation when those energy states are so close close together that multiple electrons transitioning between them produce overlapping spectral lines.

Last edited by Reality Check; Today at 12:55 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 Today, 12:50 PM   #3333
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,288
Thumbs down A lie that Rowan University has been making their own hydrinos, etc. since 2019.

Originally Posted by markie View Post
Rowan University has been making their own hydrino - in their own labs, with their own equipment - from scratch since about 2009. FYI.
17 October 2017 markie: A lie that Rowan University has been making their own hydrinos, etc. since 2009.
Some Rowan University personnel were hired by Mills in 2009. There are no published papers at all. One advantage of publishing science is that it is out there in black and white and cannot be altered. There is a PDF on Mills company web that may have been edited by anyone. There is no evidence that any work has been done for Mills or independently at Rowan University since 2009 (lie number 1).

The second lie is that Rowan University made hydrinos. They took measurements of alkali metal salts containing hydrogen that they noted matched Mills delusion of detecting hydrios in previous Mills papers. Those spectra have been explained as coming from physically possible mechanisms as you already know. That includes the 17 years that Mills displayed enormous incompetence by using instruments beyond the manufacturers' specification and attributing spectra to spurious noise.
The "characterization" were upfield shifts in NMR spectra.

9 October 2017 markie: A lie that Rowan labs were able to "make their own hydrino and characterize it".

Last edited by Reality Check; Today at 01:08 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 Today, 12:59 PM   #3334
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,288
Originally Posted by markie View Post
The idiocy of a BLP press release about that Rowan validation report that has never been published!
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 Today, 01:41 PM   #3335
Red Baron Farms
Illuminator
 
Red Baron Farms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 4,014
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Why do I get the feeling that any entity that validates hydrino experiments will be seen as "suspiciously involved with Mills".

Rowan University has been making their own hydrino - in their own labs, with their own equipment - from scratch since about 2009. FYI.
Cool. Show me one.

Oops you fail, they haven't produced a single one!

Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
The idiocy of a BLP press release about that Rowan validation report that has never been published!
Because hydrinos don't exist and to publish in a reputable journal you need actually produce the evidence for peer review and it needs to be falsifiable. Since there is no such thing as a hydrino, they can't actually show one to the peers. Impossible.

Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post

The second lie is that Rowan University made hydrinos. They took measurements of alkali metal salts containing hydrogen that they noted matched Mills delusion of detecting hydrios in previous Mills papers. Those spectra have been explained as coming from physically possible mechanisms as you already know. That includes the 17 years that Mills displayed enormous incompetence by using instruments beyond the manufacturers' specification and attributing spectra to spurious noise.
The "characterization" were upfield shifts in NMR spectra.
Exactly! Not hydrinos, just ordinary hydrogen atoms carrying little signs saying, Hey I used to be a hydrino!
When all it actually was is Mills using the equipment wrong! Turns out those little hydrogen atoms never were hydrinos. OOOPS Mills needs reeducated on how to use the equipment. I wish I got paid 100s of millions of dollars every time I used equipment improperly!
__________________
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; Today at 01:54 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 Today, 02:34 PM   #3336
markie
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
If there were a prize for voodoo physics, you’d be a strong contender, markie!

If there are “multiple photons”, there must be multiple states; if continuum radiation results, there must be an infinite number of such states.

You really should take the advice to stop digging.

Oh, and there is zero experimental evidence, of the independent kind ... voodoo experiments anyone?

You really should dig into your physics books and realize that accelerated charges radiate in a continuum fashion.
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 Today, 02:51 PM   #3337
markie
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by The Man View Post

Let's see, at m=2 the hydrino state would be 8*13.6eV
You mean, 8*13.6eV below the energy of ground state hydrogen


Quote:
And at m=4 the state after just the "non photonic, resonant energy transfer." is...

come on you can guess...

that's right 8*13.6eV, a hydrino state.
At m = 4, there is indeed 8*13.6eV released to the catalyst. But the electron has not accelerated toward the nucleus; it is still the size of ground state hydrogen. Not the same state as a hydrino.

Quote:
Not that those numbers matter much anyway with the ionization energy of water at about 12.6eV. So the water is ionized even before, well, m=0.5 (13.6eV) and as you assert "While it remains ionized, it cannot act as a catalyst. "
Look at chapter 13 and see how Mills calculates the various properties of the water molecule ; size, bond angles, and bond and ionization energies. They agree with experiment btw. The potential energy of the nascent water molecule he calculates to be -81.87 eV in equation 13.201, which is close enough to 3*27.2 eV.
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 Today, 02:58 PM   #3338
markie
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
17 October 2017 markie:
The second lie is that Rowan University made hydrinos. They took measurements of alkali metal salts containing hydrogen that they noted matched Mills delusion of detecting hydrios in previous Mills papers. Those spectra have been explained as coming from physically possible mechanisms as you already know. That includes the 17 years that Mills displayed enormous incompetence by using instruments beyond the manufacturers' specification and attributing spectra to spurious noise.
The "characterization" were upfield shifts in NMR spectra.

9 October 2017 markie: A lie that Rowan labs were able to "make their own hydrino and characterize it".
You appear to be conflating NRM spectra of hydrino compounds with UV spectroscopy taken during hydrino formation. Rowan has done both btw.
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 Today, 03:37 PM   #3339
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,288
Thumbs down markie: A lie that hydrino NRM spectra were detected at Rowan

Originally Posted by markie View Post
You....
I am talking about a repeated lie and a new lie:
9 October 2017 markie: A lie that Rowan labs were able to "make their own hydrino and characterize it".

17 October 2017 markie: A lie that Rowan University has been making their own hydrinos, etc. since 2009.
(no publications at all specifically since 2009)

And now a new lie !
17 October 2017 markie: A lie that NRM spectra of hydrino compounds or formation have ever been detected at Rowan.
There have been no published papers from Rowan University containing any NRM spectra from your delusions of hydrinos. That is what scientists who were confident in their findings would produce.

The dubious BLP validation report has upfield shifts in NMR spectra which have been attributed to hydrinos because the authors supposedly could not find any other explanation. But remember that this the Mills company web site and Mills has a history of lying. Who knows what Mills may have done to that report.

Last edited by Reality Check; Today at 03:51 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 Today, 04:03 PM   #3340
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,288
Thumbs down markie: A delusion that electrons in atoms can accelerate

Originally Posted by markie View Post
You really should dig into your physics books and realize that accelerated charges radiate in a continuum fashion.
17 October 2017 markie: A delusion that electrons in atoms can accelerate!
The result of allowing electrons to accelerate is that they spiral into the nucleus in a short time and atoms do not exist!
You know that in the real world we do not see any continuum radiation when electrons transit between low energy states. We get spectral lines - hydrogen spectral series.

I doubt that even Mills has this ignorant delusion but maybe markie has a citation.
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 Today, 04:14 PM   #3341
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,288
Thumbs down Mills lies about HUP predicting a continuum of particle masses

It is disconcerting to look for continuum and find yet more Mills lies!
Preface xxvi:
Quote:
It is further disconcerting that the Uncertainty Principle of quantum mechanics—one of its fundamental tenets—predicts a continuum of particle masses...
17 October 2017: Mills lies about HUP predicting a continuum of particle masses.
HUP is about the uncertainty in pairs of measurements.

Quote:
and gives no mechanism for the existence of atomic particles of precise inertial and gravitational mass in the first place.
17 October 2017: Mills lies abut HUP needing to give a mechanism for the "existence of atomic particles of precise inertial and gravitational mass"

Quote:
and the observation of 54.4 eV and 122.4 eV short-wavelength cutoff continuum radiation from hydrogen alone ...classical physic delusion snipped... directly disproves atomic theories such as the Bohr theory and the Schrödinger and Dirac equations
17 October 2017: Mills lies that short-wavelength cutoffs "directly disproves atomic theories".
The Bohr theory and the Schrödinger and Dirac equations predict that there are cutoffs for all the spectral line series where the continuum radiation is electrons transiting between the high quantum numbers.

Another Mills delusion that does not seem to have been noticed yet - his non-physical "catalysts". Mills starts with a delusion that ground state electrons cannot lose energy by emitting a photon to fall to his fractional states. He doubles up by claiming that only a "catalyst" can cause this magic. But how can this catalyst interact with the electron if photons are not involved? Via the strong force, weak force or gravitation?
17 October 2017: A Mills delusion that a magic catalyst somehow removes energy from ground state electrons without interacting with them.

Last edited by Reality Check; Today at 05:26 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 Today, 04:18 PM   #3342
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,413
Originally Posted by markie View Post
You really should dig into your physics books and realize that accelerated charges radiate in a continuum fashion.
The Man has, several times, taken you to task for being inconsistent.

Here’s yet another example; please re-read what you wrote in the post of yours I quoted. Specifically, note that you claimed that the EM is emitted when an electron transitions from one, well-defined state, to another, a “Mills state”. This is not classical physics, so if you’re claiming continuum radiation, you’re using voodoo physics.
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 Today, 04:38 PM   #3343
hecd2
Muse
 
hecd2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 692
Originally Posted by markie View Post
You really should dig into your physics books and realize that accelerated charges radiate in a continuum fashion.
You really should try and remember where inconsistencies have already been pointed out to you. Mills's model of the electron as a shell of uniform charge would not radiate if it changes radius because the fields outside the electron before and after the change of radius are indistinguishable. Outside the electron it always looks like a static point charge at the centre of the shell.

Last edited by hecd2; Today at 04:38 PM. Reason: grammar
hecd2 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 Today, 04:50 PM   #3344
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 12,052
Originally Posted by markie View Post
You mean, 8*13.6eV below the energy of ground state hydrogen
Yep.


Originally Posted by markie View Post
At m = 4, there is indeed 8*13.6eV released to the catalyst. But the electron has not accelerated toward the nucleus; it is still the size of ground state hydrogen. Not the same state as a hydrino.

Aww, and you were doing so well, actually correcting crap for a change.

Right, "Not the same state as a hydrino" because no one told the hydrogen yet that its binding energy had increased or the electron that it had just lost potential energy to the water. So it just stays "the size of ground state hydrogen". I guess that potential energy gets to be in both the water and the hydrogen till they both wake up and smell the coffee. And here I thought conservation of energy was at least the one thing that Mills was trying to maintain. Guess I now have to apologize to everyone who was claiming it was a free energy machine.

Sorry everyone Mills is more messed up than I thought.

As any even number meets the requirement of 2*m where m is an integer half the sub ground hydrino states, by the cited formula, meet the above criteria.


Originally Posted by markie View Post
Look at chapter 13 and see how Mills calculates the various properties of the water molecule ; size, bond angles, and bond and ionization energies. They agree with experiment btw. The potential energy of the nascent water molecule he calculates to be -81.87 eV in equation 13.201, which is close enough to 3*27.2 eV.

No thanks, I don't even read good fiction let alone bad fiction. Perhaps Mills should let the National Institute of Standards and Technology know his calculations don't agree with their cited experimental data.

Anywho that just gives you a max of m=3. So you give up conservation of energy just to get to m=4 and then can't even get m=4 in the same post, classic.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ

Last edited by The Man; Today at 04:56 PM. Reason: Typo and appology
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 Today, 05:04 PM   #3345
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 12,052
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
The Man has, several times, taken you to task for being inconsistent.

Here’s yet another example; please re-read what you wrote in the post of yours I quoted. Specifically, note that you claimed that the EM is emitted when an electron transitions from one, well-defined state, to another, a “Mills state”. This is not classical physics, so if you’re claiming continuum radiation, you’re using voodoo physics.
Well, technically, as the assertion is multiples of 13.6eV (with whatever voodoo numerology). You just get a crap load of 13.6eV photons.
__________________
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 Today, 06:08 PM   #3346
markie
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by hecd2 View Post
You really should try and remember where inconsistencies have already been pointed out to you. Mills's model of the electron as a shell of uniform charge would not radiate if it changes radius because the fields outside the electron before and after the change of radius are indistinguishable. Outside the electron it always looks like a static point charge at the centre of the shell.
Recall that there is a proton in the middle of that electron orbitsphere, and that there is no field outside the orbitsphere.

I'll grant that for a free electron, a planar disc, in the far field does appear as a point charge.
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 Today, 06:17 PM   #3347
markie
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
The Man has, several times, taken you to task for being inconsistent.

Here’s yet another example; please re-read what you wrote in the post of yours I quoted. Specifically, note that you claimed that the EM is emitted when an electron transitions from one, well-defined state, to another, a “Mills state”. This is not classical physics, so if you’re claiming continuum radiation, you’re using voodoo physics.
It may help if you read the Introduction in Mills GUTCP. He explains why typical excited states radiate at discrete wavelengths when the orbital collapses to lower energy states. He explains why this is not the case below the ground state. For a warmup, from page 26:

THE NATURE OF THE PHOTON IS THE BASIS OF QUANTIZATION AND EXISTENCE OF EXCITED AND HYDRINO STATES OF ATOMIC HYDROGEN

It is well known that resonator cavities can trap electromagnetic radiation of discrete resonant frequencies. The orbitsphere is a resonator cavity that traps photons of discrete frequencies. The radius of an orbitsphere increases with the absorption of electromagnetic energy. The solutions to Maxwell’s equations for modes that can be excited in the orbitsphere resonator cavity give rise to four quantum numbers, and the energies of the modes are the experimentally known hydrogen spectrum including the Lamb shift, fine structure, and hyperfine structure.


etc.
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 Today, 06:19 PM   #3348
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,288
Originally Posted by markie View Post
Look at chapter 13 and see...
yet more Mills delusions. This is a chapter of multiple insanity. Section 13.4 is water molecule madness.
  1. Treating molecules classically.
  2. A screed of inane "force balance" equations.
  3. A deluded cartoon (figure 13.4) where his spherical electron shells become "ellipsoidal" and vey distorted for oxygen.
  4. Ignores that in his delusion water molecules should not exist!
    A shell of charge surrounding an opposite charge looks neutral outside of the shell. However Mills may add a delusion of charge movements across the shell ding magical stuff.
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 Today, 06:23 PM   #3349
markie
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by The Man View Post
No thanks, I don't even read good fiction let alone bad fiction. Perhaps Mills should let the National Institute of Standards and Technology know his calculations don't agree with their cited experimental data.
Rather, they agree very nicely thank you. You should check it out.

Quote:
Anywho that just gives you a max of m=3. So you give up conservation of energy just to get to m=4 and then can't even get m=4 in the same post, classic.
The m = 3 addressed the case of the water catalyst. We were discussing water as catalyst weren't we. Obviously it was not referring to your m = 4 case. Apparently not obvious to everybody.
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 Today, 06:26 PM   #3350
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,288
Thumbs down Mills lies about his "orbitsphere" delusion being a resonator cavity

Originally Posted by markie View Post
For a warmup, from page 26:
More ignorant parroting of Mills. This is a cavity resonator ("resonator cavity")
Quote:
A cavity resonator is a hollow closed conductor such as a metal box or a cavity within a metal block, containing electromagnetic waves (radio waves) reflecting back and forth between the cavity's walls. When a source of radio waves at one of the cavity's resonant frequencies is applied, the oppositely-moving waves form standing waves, and the cavity stores electromagnetic energy.
17 October 2017: Mills lies about his "orbitsphere" delusion being a resonator cavity.
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 Today, 06:32 PM   #3351
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,288
Exclamation markie: Implies that that H2 molecules do not exist

Originally Posted by markie View Post
Recall that there is a proton in the middle of that electron orbitsphere, and that there is no field outside the orbitsphere.
There has to be an electromagnetic field between atoms to create molecules. Real science has electrons that can be shared between atoms to do this.
17 October 2017 markie: Implies that that H2 molecules do not exist!
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 Today, 06:47 PM   #3352
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 26,002
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Win a Nobel for what?
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Economics?

One can easily imagine Mills turning his undoubted intellectual firepower to researching and then publishing a ground-breaking paper on the micro-economics of scams.

Literature. After all, being fictional is not only not a bar to winning, it's the usual way for it to happen.
__________________
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 Today, 08:52 PM   #3353
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 19,048
All that matters to me is that I've never seen anything from Mills other than simple devices that make arcs and sparks and melt metal, via the input of large amounts of current, imo.

The only time Mills visibly produced any electricity was when he connected some LEDs to a solar cell, and put the solar cell near the arcs. This caused the LEDS to flash in time with the arcs, which was obvious. He later appeared to add a capacitor or battery to tame down the flashing.

The arcing/sparking/heating devices appeared to me to be slightly modified common welding machines.

Mills has promised and claimed many times to have power generating devices that were:
Working in the lab
Commercially ready
Market ready
Or to be very close to all three.

Yet we have not seen hide nor hair of any such devices.

Mills has claimed to have revolutionary compounds and/or crystals, but we have never seen anything in that ballpark, either.

What really matters to me is whether or not claims are backed up.

In short, in my opinion, Mills has claimed far too much and produced absolutely nothing.

He has some long shot investors who hope to make a huge windfall and have the money to waste on Mills.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 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 11:04 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.