Stefan,
Please correct me if I am mistaken but I assume you are the same "stefan" who has posted similar complaints out at the SCP discussion group. As has frequently been stated out in the Vort Collective... Experimental evidence always trumps theory. I must confess the fact that I personally find Mills' CQM interesting, perhaps even tantalizing, see: http://personalpen.orionworks.com/blacklight-power.htm ...where I wrote a personal report on Dr. Mills' audacious CQM theory. I need to stress the fact that this is a NON-SCIENTIIC report & analysis. It is my personal take on an upstart brave new theory which seems to have a lot going for it. I tried to remain as objective as I could concerning a highly controversial theory for which I have insufficient mathematical expertise to either confirm or disprove. Let me change gears here. To be honest I am getting tired listening to yet another argument that Mills' CQM theory is better than QM. Such arguments will resolve nothing. The solution is both paradoxically simple while admittedly being technologically challenging. BLP needs to cobble together an experimental prototype which definitively verifies the fact that the technology is capable of self-running while generating lots of excess electricity. I have repeatedly suggested BLP demonstrate an EXPERIMENTAL prototype as a precursor to creating a commercial prototype. I have done so because I am under the opinion that assembling the first commercial system may still be many years off into the future. BLP bravely implies that a commercial system is just around the corner... but I don't believe it. Nevertheless, I would love to be proven wrong on this point. But until I'm proven wrong, I have to continue to rely on my own gut instincts based on my own 36 years of personal experience in the software industry. In my experience developing brand new software (and hardware), particularly a new product that has never developed before tends to take a lot longer than originally anticipated. See my personal posts: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SocietyforClassicalPhysics/conversations/messages/4330 and https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SocietyforClassicalPhysics/conversations/messages/4345 So far, Dr. Mills as repeatedly ignored the primary concerns expressed in my above posts. He has said nothing about the possibility of assembling a more definitive experimental prototype within BLPs' lab walls. IMO, he seems to be evading the question. Mills has instead deflected conversation towards the fact that BLP continues to accumulate independent scientific reports that appear to verify various aspects of his CQM theory. All the peanut gallery knows at the moment is the fact that BLP has contracted with outside engineering firms to assemble the first commercial system. The first delivery was supposed to have occurred in December of last year. That, of course, never happened. We have yet to hear when a new revised delivery date is to be expected. We have, in fact, no idea. That is another reason why I tend to think the actual delivery date for a real commercial system is likely to be years, not months off into the future. Let me end by saying I don't fault BLPs' efforts. I have no reason to think BLP or Mills are acting in less honorable ways. My primary concern is that, IMHO, if BLP wants to be taken more seriously, sooner rather than later, then I suggest the company cobble together an experimental prototype that self-runs and produces excess electricity ASAP. The prototype does not have to run long. Just long enough to prove their point. I say this because I am under the impression that the anticipated commercial system is probably going to take a lot longer than BLP had originally anticipated... perhaps as long as several more years. I say this because I suspect that if BLP attempted to cobble together nothing more deceptively simple as just an EXPERIMENTAL prototype (a prototype not meant for commercial applications) such attempts will also likely to turn out to be an equally formidable challenge. In fact I suspect the challenge is precisely why Mills has not directly replied to my suggestion. I would nevertheless be thrilled to be proven wrong on these last points. ...and perhaps Mills doesn't care to be taken more seriously sooner rather than later. Focus on developing the commercial system, and be damned with assembling another intermediate experimental demo. If BLP's financial backers remain in the loop... if they remain satisfied with the progress they are seeing, running a more stealthy operation is a perfectly legitimate strategy. Granted it's a bummer for the rest of us who reside in the peanut gallery, but it's not my call. ;-) Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
