Still a "crackpot?"
Bill Miller
electron, championed by Dr. Randell Mills.
Here is a quick review. Mills's electron is modeled as a sphere of charge
whose flow satsifies all the measured parameters of an electron.
Earlier researchers had looked at the "spherical cloud of charge" concept
and could not get past the inherent instability of that model.
But Mills's shell is not a cloud of charge. It is a sheet of charge with
zero thickness. Yes, zero. Part of the electrodynamic model's solution set
involves a delta function. Another aspect of the solution set is what I used
to consider a "useless" factoid: the 2D solution to Gauss's equation.
Mills's solution set is stable based on the zero-thickness hypothesis.
Out of this model has come the concept of electron shells that can occupy
locations closer to the nucleus than the location we call the "ground" or
"base" state. In the Hydrogen atom, these sub-Rydberg states are called
"hydrinos."
Mills's company, Black Light Power, has published numerous theoretical
papers and experimental results attesting to the existence of these
"hydrinos."
The theory has been mathematically questioned. The lab results have been
mostly ignored.
I believe that the mathematics of the hydrino is sound. But I don't wish to
debate *that* at this time. After all, no theory -- no matter how elegant or
pursuasive -- is worth anything if it is not validated experimentally.
That has just happened.
Gen3Partners in cooperation with the Harvard Smithsonian Center for
Astrophysics in Cambridge, MA. has validated the spectra associated with --
and only with -- hydrinos.
Here is their abstract,
"Spectra of low-energy high current pinch discharges in pure molecular
hydrogen and helium were recorded in the EUV region at the Harvard
Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA, USA (CfA) in an attempt
to reproduce experimental results published by BlackLight Power, Inc.
showing continuum radiation only from hydrogen [1-2]. Alternative
explanation to the claimed explanation of the observation of predicted
continuum radiation at 10.1 and 22.8 nm and going to longer wavelengths for
transitions of H to lower-energy states were considered. The continuum
radiation was observed at CFA in the 10-30 nm region that composed two bands
with one having a short wavelength cutoff at about 10 nm and another was
identifiable as a slope change on the first at about 23 nm. Considering the
low energy of 2.6 J per pulse, the observed radiation in the energy range of
about 120 eV to 40 eV, and reference experiments with He, no conventional
explanation was found to be plausible including electrode metal emission,
Bremsstrahlung radiation, ion recombination, molecular or molecular ion band
radiation, and instrument artifacts involving radicals and energetic ions
reacting at the CCD and H2 re-radiation at the detector chamber."
The complete paper is here:
http://blacklightpower.com/pdf/GEN3_Harvard.pdf
As if to put the "icing on the cake," Rowan University about a year ago,
took chemical materials that had been supplied by Mills and, in their
laboratory, replicated anomalous heat output over that which could be
explained by enthalpies associated with known chemical reactions.
*However* the chemicals had been supplied by Mills. This left the "door"
open to the possibility that Mills might have somehow "cooked the books" by
supplying chemiclas that were somehow different from those commercially
available.
Concurrent with the CfA report, Rowan released a "redo" of their previous
tests. In this case, however, they used commercially available chemicals --
not much different from those found in an "old fashioned" Gilbert Chemistry
set -- in combinations that were explicit in both form and quantity.
Rowan's report showed that, depending on the combinations of ingredients,
catalytic-inspired reactions occurred with exothermic outputs that were
between 1.5 and 6.0 times *greater* than those that could be explained using
"conventional" chemistry.
The "sprinkles" on the "icing" is that the "recipes" employed by Rowan are
included in the report so that other researchers can independently verify
the results in their own facilities.
The Rowan report is here:
http://blacklightpower.com/pdf/Rowan2010.pdf
One of the most important aspects in the verification of any scientific
breakthrough is its predictive ability. For example, the existence of radio
waves helped strongly validate Maxwell's Equations.
In this vein, we now know -- in stark contrast with whht was predicted by
the Standard Model -- that the universe is Accelerating.
Mills predicted this, based on a much-expanded cosmological model inspired
by his electron concept, several years *before* we learned of this
acceleration.
Let me suggest that Dr. Mills may not be *quite* the crackpot that some have
thought him to be.
All the best,
Bill Miller
Benj
> In this vein, we now know -- in stark contrast with whht was predicted by
> the Standard Model -- that the universe is Accelerating.
>
> Mills predicted this, based on a much-expanded cosmological model inspired
> by his electron concept, several years *before* we learned of this
> acceleration.
>
> Let me suggest that Dr. Mills may not be *quite* the crackpot that some have
> thought him to be.
I'm sorry Bill, sure this sounds good, but until Sam Wormley, Science
News or Scientific American or some other "official" source tells us
all that Dr. Mills has been removed from the "crackpot" list, we all
have no choice but to continue accusing him of wearing a tinfoil
helmet and laughing at his work no matter how much data anyone
produces. We don't need to bother to look at his results to know that
he's a crackpot! I'm confident that this topic is sensibly banned
from all the moderated physics groups...
FrediFizzx
news:8ltn5n...@mid.individual.net...
Seems a bit suspicious that Black Light Power funded the study. :-) It
certainly would have more credibility if done by researchers not connected
in any way to BLP. But then there is this to support hydrinos,
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0507193
Best,
Fred Diether
Jos Bergervoet
> Mills's company, Black Light Power, has published numerous theoretical
> papers and experimental results attesting to the existence of these
> "hydrinos."
>
> The theory has been mathematically questioned. The lab results have been
> mostly ignored.
It's a crackpot theory. It should be mostly ignored.
> .. After all, no theory -- no matter how elegant or
> pursuasive -- is worth anything if it is not validated experimentally.
>
> That has just happened.
No it hasn't. The only thing that happened is that someone else reported
strange observations.
Whether a new theory is needed to explain them remains to be seen.
Whether that new theory is a return to the old shell-model is very unlikely.
> Let me suggest that Dr. Mills may not be *quite* the crackpot that some have
> thought him to be.
He's a clever business man, as some have argued here already. His theory
is a crackpot theory. If you want you can waste your time on it, Bill,
but don't invest your money! (Or did you do that already?)
--
Jos
Jos Bergervoet
> Seems a bit suspicious that Black Light Power funded the study. :-)
Now come on, Fred! What are you insinuating?
> certainly would have more credibility if done by researchers not
> connected in any way to BLP. But then there is this to support hydrinos,
>
> http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0507193
It's not helping Bill Miller. A hydrino based on the Klein-Gordon
equation or the Dirac equation is no support for Mills' infinitely thin
shell. It would just be 3D quantum-mechanics.
And if the Blacklight Reactor doesn't work, people who invested in it
will never see their money back.. (But at least Bill helped to "fund"
some "studies").
--
Jos
Bill Miller
"FrediFizzx" <fredi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8lu7ds...@mid.individual.net...
<snip> no theory -- no matter how
>> elegant or pursuasive -- is worth anything if it is not validated
>> experimentally.
>>
>> That has just happened.
>>
>> Gen3Partners in cooperation with the Harvard Smithsonian Center for
>> Astrophysics in Cambridge, MA. has validated the spectra associated
>> with -- and only with -- hydrinos.
>
> Seems a bit suspicious that Black Light Power funded the study. :-) It
> certainly would have more credibility if done by researchers not connected
> in any way to BLP. But then there is this to support hydrinos,
>
> http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0507193
>
begging for a "piece of the action."
I *think* what has happened may be a "backlash" from the days of cold
fusion. In that scenario, a well-respected scientist reported that he had
achieved room-temperature fusion. That finding was not accompanied with any
definitive theoretical basis. When it turned out that nobody could replicate
his findings in any reliable way, a *lot* of distinguished folks ended up
with the proverbial egg all over their faces.
So... nobody (almost) was willing to take Mills's findings seriously, even
when they were backed by a very defensable theory. (After all, he's not even
a *real* Doctor, "just" an MD!)
It hasn't helped their cause that oft-promised public demonstrations of
working prototypes generating continuous power have never materialized.
"Why?" is left to speculation.
I have my own guesses as to why, but won't take anybody's time with them at
this moment.
But I *wish* that I had a financial stake in their enterprise. Alas, it
appears to be a closed game at this time.
Bill Miller
"Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:137142f2-8650-4483...@f21g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 3, 9:25 pm, "Bill Miller" <kt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In this vein, we now know -- in stark contrast with what was predicted by
> the Standard Model -- that the universe is Accelerating.
>
> Mills predicted this, based on a much-expanded cosmological model inspired
> by his electron concept, several years *before* we learned of this
> acceleration.
>
> Let me suggest that Dr. Mills may not be *quite* the crackpot that some
> have
> thought him to be.
I'm sorry Bill, sure this sounds good, but until Sam Wormley, Science
News or Scientific American or some other "official" source tells us
all that Dr. Mills has been removed from the "crackpot" list, we all
have no choice but to continue accusing him of wearing a tinfoil
helmet and laughing at his work no matter how much data anyone
produces. We don't need to bother to look at his results to know that
he's a crackpot! I'm confident that this topic is sensibly banned
from all the moderated physics groups...
**************
OK... Here's the plan.
Now that Al Gore's stake in the Carbon Exchange has become worthless, BLP
hires him to write a book, do a movie ("A Very Convenient Truth") and go on
the lecture circuit. All the tree huggers will flock to the banner since a
hydrino based economy is the ultimate green solution.
In fact, if Gore *isn't* hired, Big Oil; certainly will acquire his
services. After all, what bigger threat to the palnet could possibly exist
than HYDRINO POLLUTION!?
Autymn D. C.
A cloud is thin; a metal is thick.
thin -> shallow
http://google.com/groups?q=%22Comparisons+for+the+illiterate%22
Benj
> On Dec 4, 4:13 am, Jos Bergervoet <Name.Surn...@Company.com> wrote:
"Mills' infinitely thin shell."
> > Jos
> A cloud is thin; a metal is thick.
> thin -> shallowhttp://google.com/groups?q=%22Comparisons+for+the+illiterate%22
Autymn Womyn you ignorant slut, you can't even speak Muttish, let
alone "real" English!
Thin in Muttish, as you SHOULD know, comes from the old English thynne
or Middle English thinne (I'm not sure what is "your" time period that
you choose to be stuck in). That in turn is based upon the Latin
tenuis which comes from the Latin tendere which means "to stretch".
Thus, as should be obvious to anyone born with a brain that is not
missing a few essential fasteners as yours is, "thin" is based upon
the original meaning "having little extent from one surface to the
other" as is a natural occurrence in the physics of "stretching" an
object.
Hence your stooopid assertion that a cloud is "thin", meaning "not
dense is molecular distribution" is clearly only a Muttish addition to
the TRUE meaning of thin, and you are totally wrong.
In other words, while pretending to be some sort of language
"authority" you have only proved in a world-wide public forum that
your head is firmly up your own ass.
Ha Ha HA!
Those of us who still have brains with all the fasteners occupy
ourselves with pointing out that an "infinitely thin shell" is a
totally meaningless non-physical mathematical construct with no direct
application in reality. [even though the use of the the word "thin" is
totally correct, in this case implying ZERO extent from one surface to
the other]
If I were you, I'd be crawling on the floor trying to find those lost
fasteners. Get Nurz Ratched to help you!
Autymn D. C.
> On Dec 7, 10:03 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 4, 4:13 am, Jos Bergervoet <Name.Surn...@Company.com> wrote:
>
> "Mills' infinitely thin shell."
>
> > > Jos
> > A cloud is thin; a metal is thick.
> > thin -> shallowhttp://google.com/groups?q=%22Comparisons+for+the+illiterate%22
>
> Autymn Womyn you ignorant slut, you can't even speak Muttish, let
> alone "real" English!
wrong
> Thin in Muttish, as you SHOULD know, comes from the old English thynne
> or Middle English thinne (I'm not sure what is "your" time period that
> you choose to be stuck in). That in turn is based upon the Latin
> tenuis which comes from the Latin tendere which means "to stretch".
time period -> length
Thin and tenvis share roots and are cognate; one is not botted on
another. -re doesn't mean to -; it means -an. to - is the
prospective mood with supine participul; its Latin is -tu. tenvis and
tende both come from tene. stringe is stretch; tende is theng; tenva
is thin[nen]; tene is theew (Englisc þeowe).
> Thus, as should be obvious to anyone born with a brain that is not
> missing a few essential fasteners as yours is, "thin" is based upon
> the original meaning "having little extent from one surface to the
> other" as is a natural occurrence in the physics of "stretching" an
> object.
You made that up. When something is stretched, it becomes lean, slim,
or slender. When something is tenvis it's tenvate and becomes wide or
further astride. Something loos is scattered or sparse, as a cloud.
Thin is to thick as tenvis is to densus.
http://www.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookup.pl?stem=tenu
[snip psýkopathic babbel]
-Aut
Benj
<Snip huge load of babbling crap>
> http://www.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookup.pl?stem=tenu
Your link as usual is useless. This one doesn't work.
> [snip psýkopathic babbel]
> -Aut
You ought to know, baby, you ought to know!