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.
Reply
Old 14th December 2010, 03:06 PM   #1
Astrodude
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 371
Blacklight Power

Blacklight Power has been an apparently financially successful "free energy" startup by a Randell Mills, a medical doctor turned Physicist and Chemist. The company's flagship claim is their manufacture of the "hydrino", a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state. They claim to be able to solve all sorts of energy crises. This isn't that unusual, but the capital they've accrued from two decades is impressive, about $60,000,000. They claim to have several contracts to build hydrino generators and revolutionize energy.

I would love few things more than scientific achievement on the scale that Mills promises, but I've noticed one big problem: Most of the companies don't appear to exist. They're legal entities, but they don't have websites, sales reports, or even employees. The most legitimate one is Akridge Energy. It appears to be part of a real estate company called Akridge that actually exists. Still, there is no real evidence of a division called Akridge Energy. It's as though they have imaginary business partners. Estacado Energy Services, one of two New Mexico-based customers supplying Blacklight, is also a subsidiary of Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative. This is normal because it is a rural area, but what is strange is that Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative only has about 39 employees and sales far shy of a million dollars. Estacado Energy is probably a one man operation.
Astrodude 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 14th December 2010, 03:40 PM   #2
Madalch
The Jester
 
Madalch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,763
Originally Posted by Astrodude View Post
The company's flagship claim is their manufacture of the "hydrino", a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state.
That would suggest that the hydrino is more stable than a hydrogen atom. If this were true, why isn't hydrogen always in the form of a hydrino? And how do you get energy -out- of something that's more stable than normal? You'd have to put energy into it to turn it into normal hydrogen to do anything with it.
__________________
As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of resolving approaches zero. -Vaarsuvius
It's a rum state of affairs when you feel like punching a jar of mayonnaise in the face. -Charlie Brooker
Madalch 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 14th December 2010, 04:05 PM   #3
Bishadi
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,279
Originally Posted by Astrodude View Post
Blacklight Power has been an apparently financially successful "free energy" startup by a Randell Mills, a medical doctor turned Physicist and Chemist. The company's flagship claim is their manufacture of the "hydrino", a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state. They claim to be able to solve all sorts of energy crises. This isn't that unusual, but the capital they've accrued from two decades is impressive, about $60,000,000. They claim to have several contracts to build hydrino generators and revolutionize energy.

I would love few things more than scientific achievement on the scale that Mills promises, but I've noticed one big problem: Most of the companies don't appear to exist. They're legal entities, but they don't have websites, sales reports, or even employees. The most legitimate one is Akridge Energy. It appears to be part of a real estate company called Akridge that actually exists. Still, there is no real evidence of a division called Akridge Energy. It's as though they have imaginary business partners. Estacado Energy Services, one of two New Mexico-based customers supplying Blacklight, is also a subsidiary of Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative. This is normal because it is a rural area, but what is strange is that Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative only has about 39 employees and sales far shy of a million dollars. Estacado Energy is probably a one man operation.

Lots to read on Mills.

Some dont like him and i am beginning too

Note the wiki quote;

"Mills claims that much of standard particle physics, while having experimental validation, should be rejected due to its reliance on overfitting:[11]

The Dirac equation does not reconcile this situation. Many additional shortcomings arise such as instability to radiation, negative kinetic energy states, intractable infinities, virtual particles at every point in space, self-interaction, the Klein paradox, violation of Einstein causality, and 'spooky' action at a distance. Despite its successes, quantum mechanics (QM) has remained mysterious to all who have encountered it. Starting with Bohr and progressing into the present, the departure from intuitive, physical reality has widened. The connection between quantum mechanics and reality is more than just a "philosophical" issue. It reveals that quantum mechanics is not a correct or complete theory of the physical world and that inescapable internal inconsistencies and incongruities arise when attempts are made to treat it as a physical as opposed to a purely mathematical 'tool.'
""




How many here have read the GUT-CP?


I will bet, not ONE.
Bishadi 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 14th December 2010, 04:22 PM   #4
sol invictus
Philosopher
 
sol invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,613
Originally Posted by Astrodude View Post
Blacklight Power has been an apparently financially successful "free energy" startup by a Randell Mills, a medical doctor turned Physicist and Chemist. The company's flagship claim is their manufacture of the "hydrino", a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state. They claim to be able to solve all sorts of energy crises. This isn't that unusual, but the capital they've accrued from two decades is impressive, about $60,000,000. They claim to have several contracts to build hydrino generators and revolutionize energy.

I would love few things more than scientific achievement on the scale that Mills promises, but I've noticed one big problem: Most of the companies don't appear to exist. They're legal entities, but they don't have websites, sales reports, or even employees. The most legitimate one is Akridge Energy. It appears to be part of a real estate company called Akridge that actually exists. Still, there is no real evidence of a division called Akridge Energy. It's as though they have imaginary business partners. Estacado Energy Services, one of two New Mexico-based customers supplying Blacklight, is also a subsidiary of Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative. This is normal because it is a rural area, but what is strange is that Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative only has about 39 employees and sales far shy of a million dollars. Estacado Energy is probably a one man operation.
Where did you get the $60,000,000 figure? Is it any more reliable than the "physics" the idea is based on?

Originally Posted by Bishadi View Post
How many here have read the GUT-CP?


I will bet, not ONE.
What is "the GUT-CP", Bishadi?
sol invictus 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 14th December 2010, 04:26 PM   #5
Bishadi
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,279
Originally Posted by sol invictus View Post
Where did you get the $60,000,000 figure? Is it any more reliable than the "physics" the idea is based on?
i saw a 70 million
Quote:



What is "the GUT-CP", Bishadi?
mills book
Bishadi 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 14th December 2010, 04:29 PM   #6
ThunderChunky
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,456
Blacklight power is crap. They have been around for a while and have done nothing but make publicity for themselves.
ThunderChunky 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 14th December 2010, 04:30 PM   #7
Weak Kitten
Graduate Poster
 
Weak Kitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,909
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
Weak Kitten 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 14th December 2010, 04:45 PM   #8
Bishadi
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,279
Originally Posted by Weak Kitten View Post
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
There is the against version.

Now how about the '4"?


i.e ...... is cold fusion related?

Then the scope is,(without the peanut gallery additions) per wiki


In the hydrogen atom, these states are postulated to have an effective radius of 1/p of the ground state radius, with p being limited by the speed of light to a positive integer less than or equal to 137.[4]:31, 207 He terms these below-ground hydrogen atoms 'hydrinos'. Mills' mechanism consists of a non-radiative energy transfer between a hydrogen atom and a catalyst that is capable of absorbing a certain amount of energy. The total energy Mills says is released for hydrino transitions is large compared to the chemical burning of hydrogen, but less than nuclear reactions. Mills claims that limitations on confinement and terrestrial conditions have prevented the achievement of hydrino states below 1/30, which would correspond to an energy release of approximately 15 keV per hydrogen atom


Nothing magical or new other than a catalyst (who knows what it is?) and H react with at a 'state' (????) (i suggest a specific wavelength is absorbed (non-radiative energy (resonant energy transfer basically)), Then the H (hydrino is like a open state of Hydrogen for burning, if not, it should be), but that reaction is supposedly hotter than just H and O, apparently)

So his idea must be to expose the 'catalyst' and hydrogen, he is creating a 'hydrino'.... which is the store-'able' fuel but that reaction is his objective apparently. The key is, he believes he can put less energy into the production of the 'hydrino release'.

i noticed the patent on a microwave producing item. (magnetron produces ONE wavelength).


Or maybe that catalyst and Hydrino are what cause the reaction and it has another step (create the catalyst and the hydrino) before the reaction.

Either way, i can understand 'it could work'. The scope of his (Mills) whole 'general universe' i am not standing on in any way.


But, i do believe the cold fusion and the above hydrino ideas could work.



..

Last edited by Bishadi; 14th December 2010 at 04:52 PM.
Bishadi 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 14th December 2010, 04:58 PM   #9
sol invictus
Philosopher
 
sol invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,613
Originally Posted by Weak Kitten View Post
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
Oh, the whole idea is impossible physically. There's no question about that.

If it were possible, it would be extremely dangerous.
sol invictus 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 14th December 2010, 05:26 PM   #10
Bishadi
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,279
Originally Posted by sol invictus View Post
Oh, the whole idea is impossible physically. There's no question about that.
Another against and above you proved you havent even read the material.

Quote:

If it were possible, it would be extremely dangerous.
Give a why on both of your claims.
Bishadi 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 14th December 2010, 05:42 PM   #11
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,632
Originally Posted by Weak Kitten View Post
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
Yes. I remember being asked about something like this in the late nineties by a co-worker. It was rubbish then and chemistry hasn't changed to allow this rubbish now.
catsmate 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 14th December 2010, 07:41 PM   #12
Walter Wayne
Wayne's Words
 
Walter Wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,502
The $70,000,000 number is the venture capital. I believe this is still a private company, and the venture capatalists have so far got 0 money out. 0% is a far cry from successful.

Walt

P.S. And as far as the venture capital number goes, that may be just Randell Mills' number.
Walter Wayne 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 15th December 2010, 05:35 AM   #13
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 26,679
Originally Posted by Madalch View Post
That would suggest that the hydrino is more stable than a hydrogen atom. If this were true, why isn't hydrogen always in the form of a hydrino? And how do you get energy -out- of something that's more stable than normal? You'd have to put energy into it to turn it into normal hydrogen to do anything with it.


His claim (at least currently) is that he uses a catalyst of some sort to make regular hydrogen into hydrinos. As the hydrino supposedly has a lower energy state than the hydrogen, this process would produce energy, and it is this energy he claims to be harnessing.
__________________
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 15th December 2010, 06:00 AM   #14
Evilgiraffe
Scatterer of X-rays
 
Evilgiraffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 760
As far as I'm aware*, catalysts facilitate reactions by lowering or circumventing the activation barrier. Most reactions will go without a catalyst, having one simply makes them more efficient and economical.

Mills is claiming a reaction that absolutely will not go without his magic catalyst, hence the activation energy for this transformation must be absolutely bloody enormous since we don't see hydrogen spontaneously converting to hydrinos. He may have found a material that circumvents this barrier but I think it's..... unlikely.

*I'm currently working for my PhD in the field of catalysis. If I'm wrong about this, it'll be embarassing but I'll probably survive
Evilgiraffe 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 15th December 2010, 06:03 AM   #15
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by Bishadi View Post


But, i do believe the cold fusion and the above hydrino ideas could work.



..
What you believe has no bearing upon reality.
dafydd 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 15th December 2010, 06:12 AM   #16
sol invictus
Philosopher
 
sol invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,613
Originally Posted by Evilgiraffe View Post
As far as I'm aware*, catalysts facilitate reactions by lowering or circumventing the activation barrier. Most reactions will go without a catalyst, having one simply makes them more efficient and economical.

Mills is claiming a reaction that absolutely will not go without his magic catalyst, hence the activation energy for this transformation must be absolutely bloody enormous since we don't see hydrogen spontaneously converting to hydrinos. He may have found a material that circumvents this barrier but I think it's..... unlikely.

*I'm currently working for my PhD in the field of catalysis. If I'm wrong about this, it'll be embarassing but I'll probably survive
It's not just unlikely, it's as impossible as just about anything I can think of. The hydrogen atom has been thoroughly understood for about 90 years. Everything from extremely sensitive lab tests to very high energy collider experiments to nuclear fuson to supernova to big bang nucleosynthesis supports our model for it. And according to that model, it is impossible for there to be any state with energy below that of the standard ground state.

If there were a lower energy state, no matter how high the barrier, ground state hydrogen could tunnel to it (without a catalyst). But huge collections of hydrogen atoms (1023 and more) never exhibit such tunneling - not one atom tunnels.

If there were a lower energy state, why has it never shown up in any astrophysical observations, despite the fact that hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe? Why wasn't it populated in supernova? Why didn't hydrogen end up in that state after it first formed? Why is it that when one combines an electron with a proton it quickly settles down to the standard ground state, and never to this lower energy state? Etc. etc.
sol invictus 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 15th December 2010, 06:32 AM   #17
Evilgiraffe
Scatterer of X-rays
 
Evilgiraffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 760
Thanks Sol. It's wrong on so many levels that it's difficult to choose one to pull to pieces.
Evilgiraffe 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 15th December 2010, 06:50 AM   #18
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
If that would be the case, it would be EASY to demonstrate. Give the "catalyst" to labor so taht they can characterize hydrino. But hey....

The "catalyst" has sqare quote, because a catalyst is *NOT* giving energy for a reaction to occurs. A catalyst is only making an enthalpy of activation lower by giving a substrate support for the formation energy to be lower (platinum IIRC has this mode of action for water formation) or they enter as an intermediate product and are recycled as in in an A->B reaction with a certain enthalpy of activation, A+cata->C and C->Cata+B where both enthalpy of activation are lower and thus easier to produce. Remark on the cata is recycled.

What THEY pretend is that they have some MAGIC substance which allow them to produce hydrogen at a lower level than the ground level , called hydrino. But that could not be a catalyst because the energy would STILL be missing from the equation (the energy the system give off when going from suposedly H+cata->Hydrino).

Furthermore that would still leave "Hydrino" ashes which would be easy to characterise and differentiate to H. Unless they pretend the hydrino is immediately getting energy from the environment to go back to H.

Last time I had looked at their PDF article with the nice eliptical orbital, I laughed myself very hard. Their article was more or less classical physic without much of QM.

So yes. Scam. Thru and thru.
Aepervius 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 15th December 2010, 06:52 AM   #19
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by sol invictus View Post
It's not just unlikely, it's as impossible as just about anything I can think of. The hydrogen atom has been thoroughly understood for about 90 years. Everything from extremely sensitive lab tests to very high energy collider experiments to nuclear fuson to supernova to big bang nucleosynthesis supports our model for it. And according to that model, it is impossible for there to be any state with energy below that of the standard ground state.

If there were a lower energy state, no matter how high the barrier, ground state hydrogen could tunnel to it (without a catalyst). But huge collections of hydrogen atoms (1023 and more) never exhibit such tunneling - not one atom tunnels.

If there were a lower energy state, why has it never shown up in any astrophysical observations, despite the fact that hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe? Why wasn't it populated in supernova? Why didn't hydrogen end up in that state after it first formed? Why is it that when one combines an electron with a proton it quickly settles down to the standard ground state, and never to this lower energy state? Etc. etc.
That is another good points. But good points never stopped BL proponent.

You know the type "you are a dogmatic idiot which think everything beside your 'science' is heretic" , "he will be suppressed by men in black" etc...
Aepervius 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 15th December 2010, 07:05 AM   #20
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 26,679
I'd be interested in some responses to articles they've posted here:

http://www.blacklightpower.com/new.shtml

Particularly the second one down, from 11/29/10, "GEN3 Partners and Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) Scientists have confirmed the light signature of hydrino formation, high-energy radiation emitted as the electron of the hydrogen atom undergoes a transition below what was previously considered the lowest energy state."

There's been some suggestions that they've misrepresented the relationships between these researchers, and I'm wondering if anyone here can comment on the physics. It's a bit beyond my level, I'm afraid.
__________________
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 15th December 2010, 07:09 AM   #21
Bishadi
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,279
Originally Posted by sol invictus View Post
It's not just unlikely, it's as impossible as just about anything I can think of. The hydrogen atom has been thoroughly understood for about 90 years.
which is irrelevant.

ie.... to lower an H atom to its lower state, is simply to absorb the energy upon that mass and the atom is left hydrino. (the mills model)

I would be like taking a Hydrogen gas and removing all the energy from it and then using it. Nothing changed of the atom except the state (energy level; resonance (energy upon that mass).

Quote:

Everything from extremely sensitive lab tests to very high energy collider experiments to nuclear fuson to supernova to big bang nucleosynthesis supports our model for it.
WOW......

That is like ranting, we use fire, so we know what fire is; but that is a lie.

Quote:
And according to that model, it is impossible for there to be any state with energy below that of the standard ground state.
'Ground state'

Is BEC (cold) a 'ground state'?

What is the difference of a Hydrogen atom at 100 degrees f and BEC cold?

WHat is the difference of the 2 atoms? Is it 'energy' upon that mass?
Quote:
If there were a lower energy state, no matter how high the barrier, ground state hydrogen could tunnel to it (without a catalyst).
Tunnel......

isnt that spooky action stuff? ie.... what tunneling is there for hydrino production? I read that the catalyst upon CONTACT is causing the 'release' of energy. (the reaction)

Quote:
But huge collections of hydrogen atoms (1023 and more) never exhibit such tunneling - not one atom tunnels.
That statement means, you dont know much about the accellerators as that is how the symmetry interpretatins even exist. (they rant on tunneling and you say NOT ONE ATOM TUNNELS.
Quote:
If there were a lower energy state, why has it never shown up in any astrophysical observations, despite the fact that hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe?
Astrophysics is not using lab experiments. Did you know the spctrum of H at BEC has a completely different spectrum? http://focus.aps.org/story/v2/st22
Quote:


Why wasn't it populated in supernova?
what's a super nova to this thread?

THe SN in itself is a speculation.
Quote:


Why didn't hydrogen end up in that state after it first formed?
kind of like asking why Ice forms from snow. You need to comprehend the path from beginning to ending.

Quote:


Why is it that when one combines an electron with a proton it quickly settles down to the standard ground state,
that ground state is relevant to the environment. ie.... compare and H atom at 100 degrees with a BEC atom. Both are H atoms with a proton and electron but they are in completely different states (of energy upon the structure)

Quote:
and never to this lower energy state? Etc. etc.
Your post is a perfect example of showing to the people on this forum why so little is understood within the complacent.


Think in the sense of how molecules form, elements combine with energy upon that structure and when a reaction occurs that energy (em) is released. That is why we eat food, our metabolisms cause a reaction, the remaining elements are pooped out....... 'we use the energy'

Last edited by Bishadi; 15th December 2010 at 07:10 AM.
Bishadi 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 15th December 2010, 07:40 AM   #22
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by Bishadi View Post
which is irrelevant.

ie.... to lower an H atom to its lower state, is simply to absorb the energy upon that mass and the atom is left hydrino. (the mills model)

I would be like taking a Hydrogen gas and removing all the energy from it and then using it. Nothing changed of the atom except the state (energy level; resonance (energy upon that mass).

WOW......

That is like ranting, we use fire, so we know what fire is; but that is a lie.

'Ground state'

Is BEC (cold) a 'ground state'?

What is the difference of a Hydrogen atom at 100 degrees f and BEC cold?

WHat is the difference of the 2 atoms? Is it 'energy' upon that mass?
Tunnel......

isnt that spooky action stuff? ie.... what tunneling is there for hydrino production? I read that the catalyst upon CONTACT is causing the 'release' of energy. (the reaction)



That statement means, you dont know much about the accellerators as that is how the symmetry interpretatins even exist. (they rant on tunneling and you say NOT ONE ATOM TUNNELS.

Astrophysics is not using lab experiments. Did you know the spctrum of H at BEC has a completely different spectrum? http://focus.aps.org/story/v2/st22
what's a super nova to this thread?

THe SN in itself is a speculation.
kind of like asking why Ice forms from snow. You need to comprehend the path from beginning to ending.

that ground state is relevant to the environment. ie.... compare and H atom at 100 degrees with a BEC atom. Both are H atoms with a proton and electron but they are in completely different states (of energy upon the structure)



Your post is a perfect example of showing to the people on this forum why so little is understood within the complacent.


Think in the sense of how molecules form, elements combine with energy upon that structure and when a reaction occurs that energy (em) is released. That is why we eat food, our metabolisms cause a reaction, the remaining elements are pooped out....... 'we use the energy'
Have you ever had a physics lesson? It doesn't look like it.
dafydd 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 15th December 2010, 10:05 AM   #23
Astrodude
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 371
Originally Posted by Madalch View Post
That would suggest that the hydrino is more stable than a hydrogen atom. If this were true, why isn't hydrogen always in the form of a hydrino? And how do you get energy -out- of something that's more stable than normal? You'd have to put energy into it to turn it into normal hydrogen to do anything with it.
I think they're claiming that the ground state of a hydrogen atom doesn't exist and stability is variable depending on reactions currently going on, but I don't understand his science. I don't understand quantum mechanics either so that doesn't mean it's wrong, but I think Mills' reports are cooked and not any real hydrinos. I'm more interested in the experiments and tests because that's much easier to understand than the theory.
Astrodude 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 15th December 2010, 10:11 AM   #24
Astrodude
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 371
Originally Posted by sol invictus View Post
Where did you get the $60,000,000 figure? Is it any more reliable than the "physics" the idea is based on?
I would assume it is. Investors report their investments to the IRS or SEC for tax purposes. With computers and the "Edit and Find" buttons a quick search of Blacklight power in tax forms should reveal how much investment they've received.

Banks also have to report loans they make. 60 million dollars a reasonably safe approximation.
Astrodude 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 15th December 2010, 10:18 AM   #25
Astrodude
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 371
Originally Posted by Weak Kitten View Post
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
The question is what has happened to their investors? Power statistics are reasonably well kept, they have to be for financial purposes. Have any of their generators delivered as promised? That's what I'm trying to figure out.

It is possible for a legitimate product to be based on junk science as one can reach the correct conclusion from the wrong premises.

Originally Posted by Weak Kitten View Post
It's a scam, and apparently a fairly old (1992) and well run scam. Don't bother looking it up on wiki, the article is completely bland and I wouldn't be surprised if they had people grooming Wikipedia to keep the scam going.

There are articles and forum discussions about this going quite far back and they all seem to boil down to the same thing. Actual atomic physicists who have looked at the numbers seem to be saying that they don't add up properly and don't cover a bunch of known atomic behaviors.
The question is what has happened to their investors? Power statistics are reasonably well kept, they have to be for financial purposes. Have any of their generators delivered as promised? That's what I'm trying to figure out.

It is possible for a legitimate product to be based on junk science as one can reach the correct conclusion from the wrong premises. For instance, Isaac Newton invented the reflecting telescope but based it on an incorrect theory of of light because he thought it had a corpuscular nature. The wave theory and wave/particle duality turned out to better explain Newton's invention than Newton's theory!

Last edited by Astrodude; 15th December 2010 at 10:37 AM.
Astrodude 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 15th December 2010, 10:53 AM   #26
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,143
Originally Posted by Astrodude View Post
The question is what has happened to their investors? Power statistics are reasonably well kept, they have to be for financial purposes. Have any of their generators delivered as promised? That's what I'm trying to figure out.
Have any of their generators been delivered at all?

I would guess "no".

Quote:
It is possible for a legitimate product to be based on junk science as one can reach the correct conclusion from the wrong premises.
Sure. For example, a drug could work even if the theory about it is wrong. But energy generation isn't a very good candidate for such events. Energy generation requires energy input, and it's generally pretty hard to keep providing the required input if you don't know what the required input is. Blacklight's theories aren't just a wrong explanation for a real event, they're an impossible explanation for something that doesn't happen.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 15th December 2010, 10:56 AM   #27
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,618
I'm trying to remember the anecdote... there was a physicist who first proposed the possibilitiy of a stable low orbital below traditional ground state while driving, and phoned home to leave the idea on his answering machine in case he crashed. He thought it was that amazing an idea as an energy source and that he had to secure the knowledge for the world.

I think that was back in the '60s, so Blacklight is essentially pitching a failed hypothesis from two generations ago.

Does anybody recognize that anecdote? I sincerely can't remember where I read it. I know it wasn't Feynman.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski 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 15th December 2010, 11:54 AM   #28
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 37,535
You know, if you want to look at an "out there" idea or two for energy production, look at the Polywell or Paul Kolok's Plasmak. Both are unproven by there is no reason we know of YET why they cannot work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell
http://www.prometheus2.net/

There is no need to consider ideas that there is significant negative proof of.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch 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 15th December 2010, 12:21 PM   #29
Astrodude
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 371
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
You know, if you want to look at an "out there" idea or two for energy production, look at the Polywell or Paul Kolok's Plasmak. Both are unproven by there is no reason we know of YET why they cannot work.
Both of these look very cool.
Astrodude 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 16th December 2010, 10:50 AM   #30
davefoc
Philosopher
 
davefoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: orange country, california
Posts: 9,402
I have followed the BLP story for awhile. I think I even started a thread about it years ago.

It certainly seems like a scam. The claims are grandiose and at least some of them seem readily testable. But there never is any independent verification of the claims and the ideas and products described on the site remain well below any mainstream visibility.

The only thing different about this scam and more routine scams that I can see is that the site and the reported research have the patina of legitimacy. It seems like they might have legitimate researchers producing legitimate documentation of research, but everything produced has to be part of supporting the bogus science claims that underlie the BLP business.

I have wondered what it would be like to work in the organization. I envision a leader that is viewed as looney by the researchers who chug along doing what they are told. But I know too little about the organization to know even if they still have or ever had legitimate researchers. It is a private company which is too poorly known to generate enough interest to justify investigation by independent journalists so almost all that is knowable by the public is what they publish on their website.

It has been quite awhile now, but I tried to pin down some of their claims of investment by utilities and I wasn't able to do so as I recall.

ETA: Here's a link to a paper produced by a Rowan University research group purporting to have found energy greater than was predicted for the known heat production for various reactions. I quickly read through it and there is a table where they list a lot of different reactions where they found extra energy. What I couldn't figure out quickly was what they did differently to get the extra energy.

http://users.rowan.edu/~jansson/blac...summer2009.pdf

From the conclusion section:
Quote:
The scientific investigations completed at Rowan University make it quite clear that there is a source of heat being generated in these numerous chemical reactions that cannot be explained in the confines of conventional modern chemistry. Dozens of calibrations on both the 5X and 50X calorimeter cells have given our research team confidence that there is but a small error in the water flow calorimetry, (having coupling efficiencies averaging above 98%). In all cases the heat gains observed are many multiples greater than any potential inaccuracies of our measurement system.
__________________
The way of truth is along the path of intellectual sincerity. -- Henry S. Pritchett

Perfection is the enemy of good enough -- Russian proverb

Last edited by davefoc; 16th December 2010 at 11:20 AM.
davefoc 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 16th December 2010, 11:25 AM   #31
Bishadi
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,279
Originally Posted by davefoc View Post
I have followed the BLP story for awhile. I think I even started a thread about it years ago.

It certainly seems like a scam. The claims are grandiose and at least some of them seem readily testable. But there never is any independent verification of the claims and the ideas and products described on the site remain well below any mainstream visibility.

The only thing different about this scam and more routine scams that I can see is that the site and the reported research have the patina of legitimacy. It seems like they might have legitimate researchers producing legitimate documentation of research, but everything produced has to be part of supporting the bogus science claims that underlie the BLP business.

I have wondered what it would be like to work in the organization. I envision a leader that is viewed as looney by the researchers who chug along doing what they are told. But I know too little about the organization to know even if they still have or ever had legitimate researchers. It is a private company which is too poorly known to generate enough interest to justify investigation by independent journalists so almost all that is knowable by the public is what they publish on their website.

It has been quite awhile now, but I tried to pin down some of their claims of investment by utilities and I wasn't able to do so as I recall.
from their website

GEN3 Partners and Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) Scientists have confirmed the light signature of hydrino formation, high-energy radiation emitted as the electron of the hydrogen atom undergoes a transition below what was previously considered the lowest energy state. Read the results in the GEN3 and CfA Report "Validation of the Observation of Soft X-ray Continuum Radiation from Low-Energy Pinch Discharges in the Presence of Molecular Hydrogen."

11/29/10


http://www.blacklightpower.com/new.shtml


i did not find the direct publication but i did find an item that could assist in the energy states

Often when something new is coming not too many are publishing. Did you notice in a previous post i mentioned the patents (magnetron/microwave)? Because i knew, they would tie that part up as it will establish what the catalyst wavelength is.



Read below about establishing the 'states' of H




Quote:
The performance of our computational technique is tested by comparing our calculations of the p - s and p - d transitions in Fe XVIII and Fe XIX to known experimental results. An estimate of the Lamb shift for these transitions shows that it may start to play a role at this level of 10-3Å accuracy and therefore it has to be included for more precise calculations.

Finally, I will present my work on NIST databases. In particular, I will show two interactive databases designed to calculate total energies and transition frequencies of hydrogen and deuterium as well as hydrogen-like ions. The values are highly accurate and based on current knowledge of the relevant theory, which includes relativistic, quantum electrodynamic, recoil, and nuclear size effects. The hydrogen-like ion database is possibly of interest for X-ray spectroscopy, whereas the hydrogen and deuterium data base lays the theoretical groundwork for precise determination of ground and excited energies.
http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/itamp/xda...tochigova.html
Bishadi 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 16th December 2010, 11:29 AM   #32
Bishadi
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,279
i found it

here is a 38 pg pdf

http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/GEN3_Harvard.pdf
Bishadi 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 16th December 2010, 12:25 PM   #33
davefoc
Philosopher
 
davefoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: orange country, california
Posts: 9,402
Thanks for the link to the paper Bishadi. As you might have noticed I added a link to a paper written by a Rowan University researcher to my original post.

I looked around the web for academic responses to the paper I linked to and I didn't find any. The paper was linked to on a few science type blogs, but the comments as yet didn't go beyond making note of the fact that the paper wasn't published in a peer reviewed journal, the study was funded by BLP and that it unlikely that the hydrino theory is correct.

The paper you linked to seems to be subject to the same criticism, i.e. not peer reviewed and it is funded by BLP. However, it seems legitimate and it seems to report a result which is not consistent with current scientific knowledge. Beyond that, I don't have any comments, at least not yet.
__________________
The way of truth is along the path of intellectual sincerity. -- Henry S. Pritchett

Perfection is the enemy of good enough -- Russian proverb
davefoc 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 16th December 2010, 12:33 PM   #34
Astrodude
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 371
Originally Posted by Bishadi View Post
from their website

GEN3 Partners and Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) Scientists have confirmed the light signature of hydrino formation, high-energy radiation emitted as the electron of the hydrogen atom undergoes a transition below what was previously considered the lowest energy state. Read the results in the GEN3 and CfA Report "Validation of the Observation of Soft X-ray Continuum Radiation from Low-Energy Pinch Discharges in the Presence of Molecular Hydrogen."

11/29/10


http://www.blacklightpower.com/new.shtml


i did not find the direct publication but i did find an item that could assist in the energy states

Often when something new is coming not too many are publishing. Did you notice in a previous post i mentioned the patents (magnetron/microwave)? Because i knew, they would tie that part up as it will establish what the catalyst wavelength is.



Read below about establishing the 'states' of H






http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/itamp/xda...tochigova.html
Ah, GEN3 partners has verified their claims. Surely, GEN3 is a chemical powerhouse or biotechnology giant, right? Well, according to their website GEN3 partners is basically a consulting firm. Also, look at their testimonial section:

“Even though our R&D group had been working on this problem for over a decade, GEN3 developed a breakthrough solution in 90 days — a solution we never considered.” Fortune 100 industrial products company

“We think of GEN3 as providing the R&D expertise of a very large corporation for the budget of a small corporation.” Fortune 500 agricultural production company

“It’s fascinating to find an organized method for stretching your thought process in directions that you never considered before.” Leading Fuel Cell Company

“The students’ extreme satisfaction is derived from the level of the materials, the instructors mastery of the fields and the extraordinary instruction skills they demonstrated.” Fortune 100 industrial manufacturing company




I think it's strange that they didn't specify which companies gave the endorsements! GEN3 probably set up the bad experiment and paid Bykanov to write about their data.

Also, Alexander Bykanov never specifically played a part in data collection. He was not operating the spectrometer. He was at Cymer. Never in the paper is it suggested that the entire process was peer reviewed. The experimental method tells all. "The BLP light source loaned to CfA and the experimental set up for recording EUV spectra are shown in Figures 1 and 2. These electrodes and test equipment including the high-voltage supplies, turbo pumps, back-illuminated CCD and CCD data processing equipment were also provided by BLP."(page 2)

That's reminiscent of the stories about Uri Gellar bending flimsy plastic silverware but claiming that it was metal.
Astrodude 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 16th December 2010, 12:47 PM   #35
Emet
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,295
Originally Posted by Astrodude View Post
I would assume it is. Investors report their investments to the IRS or SEC for tax purposes. With computers and the "Edit and Find" buttons a quick search of Blacklight power in tax forms should reveal how much investment they've received.

Banks also have to report loans they make. 60 million dollars a reasonably safe approximation.
Don't know anything about researching the above, but I did find this:

Quote:
Most of BLP’s investors are undisclosed, but it did receive $10 million from electric utilities Conectiv and Pacificorp, as well as high-profile members of its own board like Shelby Brewer, assistant secretary of nuclear energy under Reagan, and Michael Jordan, chief executive of Electronic Data Systems.
http://venturebeat.com/2009/07/30/bl...er-from-water/
Emet 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 16th December 2010, 12:56 PM   #36
Bishadi
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,279
Originally Posted by davefoc View Post
Thanks for the link to the paper Bishadi. As you might have noticed I added a link to a paper written by a Rowan University researcher to my original post.

I looked around the web for academic responses to the paper I linked to and I didn't find any. The paper was linked to on a few science type blogs, but the comments as yet didn't go beyond making note of the fact that the paper wasn't published in a peer reviewed journal, the study was funded by BLP and that it unlikely that the hydrino theory is correct.

The paper you linked to seems to be subject to the same criticism, i.e. not peer reviewed and it is funded by BLP. However, it seems legitimate and it seems to report a result which is not consistent with current scientific knowledge. Beyond that, I don't have any comments, at least not yet.
Fair bet across the board.

ie... i like it when people see that a representation from a single source cannot really be confirmed unless you did it yourself.

That could be a good argument.

Ie... i have a question; if scientific information can benefit mankind, no one has a right to subdue its testing and application to assist the benefit of mankind, right? For example, if Edison (GE) had the flourescent light for 100 yrs, and now it is mandated as required because it benefits us all, isnt there a conflict of interest? They discounted the usage to sell another product and sold more juice and products because of it (profit). But all the time, the 'business' knew, the flourescent light was better.

The next poster claimed some corp is funding them?

I wonder who? (Which invisible hand)


Now if 'the students' want to do it, then do it. Who is going to assist a private funding and 'get er done'.


I posted that i think its possible and why.

But i am a hydrogen energy kind of guy (from water, store solar energy to H/O production; anyone can do it)
Bishadi 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 16th December 2010, 01:56 PM   #37
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 19,246
Excuse my ignorance of physics, but can someone explain what the following means or is supposed to mean: "a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state".
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift 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 16th December 2010, 05:36 PM   #38
MattTheTubaGuy
Critical Thinker
 
MattTheTubaGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 261
something that is physically impossible. it is called the ground state because it is the lowest possible state. anything below the ground state just doesn't make sense.
I have done some of this stuff in quantum physics. it gets quite complicated, especially the Schroedinger equation. Not looking forward to 3rd year QM too much!

I am still confused about 'energy upon mass'
__________________
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
-- Albert Einstein
"Never memorize something that you can look up."
— also Albert Einstein

Last edited by MattTheTubaGuy; 16th December 2010 at 05:37 PM.
MattTheTubaGuy 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 17th December 2010, 05:28 AM   #39
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 26,679
Originally Posted by Astrodude View Post
Ah, GEN3 partners has verified their claims. Surely, GEN3 is a chemical powerhouse or biotechnology giant, right? Well, according to their website GEN3 partners is basically a consulting firm.

When you start looking into these claims, it just gets more woo. If you take a look at the comments here:


http://www.greentechmedia.com/articl...iter-of-water/


you find this:

Quote:
"Hmm - I received the following response to my request to CfA for verification of the study. They acknowledge that a study was commissioned by Gen3 and performed within their facilities and by their technician but deny a relationship with A. Bykanov. Make of it what you will.

———————————

Dear <name withheld>:
The company Gen3 (representing Blacklight Power) paid for the use
of one of our spectrometers and the technicians to operate it to make
standard measurements of a supplied hydrogen sample. The results of
those measurements were submitted to Gen3. A. Bykanov has no affiliation
with the CfA and the Center for Astrophysics makes no claims nor did it
participate in any research involving “hydrino transitions”.
"

So it seems they're misrepresenting the nature of the involvement of the Harvard CfA, in an attempt to borrow their credibility. If you have something real, why would you do that?


Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
Excuse my ignorance of physics, but can someone explain what the following means or is supposed to mean: "a hydrogen atom with an electron below ground state".

It comes down to the fact that Mills and his Blacklight crew believe our current understanding of the states of hydrogen are just plain wrong. What we consider to be the ground state actually isn't, according to them.
__________________
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 17th December 2010, 06:03 AM   #40
Bishadi
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,279
Originally Posted by MattTheTubaGuy View Post
something that is physically impossible. it is called the ground state because it is the lowest possible state. anything below the ground state just doesn't make sense.
have you ever thought maybe the battery in the scale is bad.

What if the scale was reestablished?

Quote:
I have done some of this stuff in quantum physics. it gets quite complicated, especially the Schroedinger equation. Not looking forward to 3rd year QM too much!
It isn't so tough, once you comprehend what each portion of theorem is describing.

Quote:

I am still confused about 'energy upon mass'
That is normal when not taking into consideration that energy is not just speed (kinetic). Guys like Lavoisier shared what caloric is.


Here is a publication, in math that will offer you a venue on all three fronts of your post; a).... ground state, b).... energy upon mass (caloric) c).... and all in math

GEOMETRIC RENORMALIZATION BELOW THE GROUND
STATE

9/30/10 (maybe to new for a few)

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/...009.6227v1.pdf

Abstract. The caloric gauge was introduced in [24] by Tao with studying
large data energy critical wave maps mapping from R2+1 to hyperbolic space
Hm in view. In [1] Bejenaru, Ionescu, Kenig, and Tataru adapted the caloric
gauge to the setting of Schr¨odinger maps from Rd+1 to the standard sphere
S2 ֒! R3 with initial data small in the critical Sobolev norm. Here we develop
the caloric gauge in a bounded geometry setting with a construction valid up to the ground state energy, which for maps R2+1 !Mm is the natural limitation
imposed by the harmonic map heat flow used to define the caloric gauge. =In
[20] we apply these results to the study of Schr¨odinger maps lying below the ground state energy.[/b]



But this is an interesting item within the doc...


Lemma 7.4 (Equations of motion). Let ϕ : R+ × R2 → M be a heat flow with
classical initial data whose energy E0 is less than Ecrit, let e be a caloric gauge for ..., and let ψx, ψs, Ax be the associated derivative fields and connection fields. [/u]Then we have the evolution equations...[/u]





Enjoy the ride

Last edited by Bishadi; 17th December 2010 at 06:05 AM.
Bishadi 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 01:46 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.