Eric, thanks for summarizing his patent for the Vortex readers.
From patenting ethics point of view this is a very strange approach trying
to patent something, It almost looks like a quick job, dumping his mindset.
His last figure is an example of that.
He is following the track of worldwide
I thought Kevin just made the point that Rossi was not convicted of a
felony. I guess what you're saying is that even if he had been, it
wouldn't matter. Well, that's an argument for another day.
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:34 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Kevin, the skeptics
Any interest in helping predict earthquakes? It'll only take a minute.
An engineer named Eric Dollard (who was discussed here a few years ago) is
re-building a seismic early warning system based on Tesla technology.
The previous version narrowly predicted the Fukushima earthquake-tsunami
gammas and xrays won't (as far as I know) turn a hdyrino into a hydrogen
through ionization, but a cosmic ray (a high energy particle) *can* ionize
a hyrino and turn it into a hydrogen when it recaptures some other electron.
In Mills's theory, energy transfer to the catalyst (by bond breakage,
http://nari.arc.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/17WELLS_ABSTRACT.pdf#overlay-context=seedling2014
Jeff, it is so refreshing to find someone in the Vo/CMNS who has read Mills
work carefully enough to understand what is going on, instead of mindless
whacks based on a press release. Thanks for finding the Wikipedia discussion
of the Forster energy transfer. Mills had cited it in earlier
if FRET (Forster Resonance Enegy Transfer) can happen for manganese in a
dipole dipole energy transfer that varies with distance to the 1/6th power
then Mills is not totally off base with his theory of a hydrogen
transferring energy via FRET.
this is all I could find at the moment for
From: David Roberson
A thought just occurred to me. Is it not possible to ionize
a hydrino with high temperatures, gamma radiation, or other energetic
processes? This should be able to return the hydrino back into hydrogen
again which should be
As far as I know, Mills's theory does not predict a continuum radiation
having a cuttoff at a frequency that corresponds to a 27.2 eV for
transitions that start from n = 1 (maybe fractional to fractional
transition does, I don't know)
see here:
Your spiel is a complete cop out.
The Lehigh chart, which I have seen, shows a distinct signature.
A so-called continuum with a cutoff is NOT a signature. It is a
subterfuge.
Mills has been frustrated over the years in being unable to show a distinct
signature for the first level of
Thanks for pointing out the NET article, Alain.
I recall a number of private conversations I had with Steve Krivit
concerning the Tsoukalas vs. Taleyarkhan investigation. This was during a
time when I was still on Krivit's BoD. (I was on the NET BoD for
approximately 3-4 months and ending
Hello Jones
I have talked to plasmaphysicists and they say that the continuumspectrum (
which was reproduced) proves that there is a until now unknown physical proces
going on when hydrogen atoms collide (probably during 3 body reactions).
Peter v Noorden
- Original Message -
thank you Peter,
Are there any more groups that you know replicated Mills's work - besides
Rowan?
The link above shows the authors to be H Conrads, R Mills and Th Wrubel, so
Mills was involved but it was done outside of BLP laboratories (I assume).
here is the abstract from the link you gave:
A
Hi Peter,
There is no reason to delve into unknown physical processes when there is a
well known alternative way to test for a signature of hydrino redundancy.
This was in fact performed in the Lehigh work. It is obvious and it could be
done by Mills today, except for the fact that oops .
Hello Jeff,
Mills only provided the cell which was send to Conrads.
Mills was not involved in the experiments which where done in Jüllich by
Conrads (and a Phd). Conrads was a very respected plasmaphysicist (Germany).
Unfortunateley he died years ago. A collegue of him in the Netherlands
Like producing a positively charge sphere and bringing it near a negatively
charged sphere in order to get the negative sphere to discharge?
Harry
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:17 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Harry, I have been following the hydrino discussion and I believe that
The article (5 parts) are published
I noticed a paragraphe which remind me the book of Charles Beaudette about
fleischPons tragedy...
*Taleyarkhan contributed to the conflict in three ways. First, although he
responded to his critics convincingly in scientific journals, he failed to
I don’t know what Jones is attempting to prove by citing a Thermacore
electrolytic cell experiment from long ago and neglecting the later years of
studies in the gas phase with water bath calorimetery and magnetic resonance
spectroscopy of effluent gases which show the presence of hydrinos.
Mike
What Mills presents as a definitive demonstration of hydrinos is illustrate
in the Technical Presentation using a special apparatus and performed by GEN
3 partners. The apparatus produces a stream of protons which is illuminated
by a burst from an electron gun. The spectrum from the creation of
Mike,
I am bit surprised and disappointed that you apparently do not realize that
the study in question was indeed gas phase.
This was in fact a nickel hydrogen (capillary tube) reactor of Thermacore’s
own design, and the study was done for the Air Force at Wright Patterson.
This is as close to
Hello Jones
You mean the experiment in which a very long capillary tube of nickel was
pressurised with H2 gas and put in a K2CO3 solution?
Peter
- Original Message -
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 7:11 PM
Subject: RE:
Wells was proposing that project in 2013, what have happened mean while?
http://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?1757-LENR-Aircraft-gets-NASA-research-grant
http://nari.arc.nasa.gov/2013#SeedlingPhaseI
any news?
2014/1/20 Marcus Haber tr...@gmx.de
Hello Peter,
Here is the citation on the LENR site. The fact that it is an older paper
should not diminish the fact that it was in Mills’ interest to ignore both the
results and the Lehigh technique.
https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GernertNnascenthyd.pdf
Dear Peter, as usual, Mills will proceed on his own agenda. On the SCP
forum, he has mentioned he will show the device now illustrated and talk
about applications. The website will be updated with more details. The MHD
energy converter is not yet ready, so the overall package cannot be
Taking the hypothesis that Mills Hydrino theory is not valid, (please, take
that hypothesis as an experience of thinking)
is it possible according to given evidence that Mills and Blacklight
experience a classic LENR+, similar to what Brillouin obtain from it's
Qwave, similar to what Defkalion
What is **nascent** H2O as a catalyst?
Is this similar or identical to Santilli's HHO?
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote:
Taking the hypothesis that Mills Hydrino theory is not valid, (please,
take that hypothesis as an experience of thinking)
is it
Alan , BLP belongs to the chemical world, LENR= Low Energy Nuclear
Reactions, a whole different world. Both have proceeded for decades in the
expectation of a new power source for mankind. Defkalion belongs to the LENR
world. There are a number of other 'exotic' energy devices proposed. Both
BLP
Jones, the Thermacore experiment was done before I was tracking the scene,
and I believe Mills and Thermacore had gone their separate ways. You might
term it a gas phase experiment because the capillary tubing was internally
pressurized. The excess heat reaction occurred in an electrolytic
After reading Beaudette's book (Excess Heat) I would like to list, details
the critics that were published on LENR calorimetries.
Forget about theory, neutrons, isotopic shifts... just calorimetry.
corrst me if I'm wrong
He talk of 4 critics.
1- Nathan Lewis, who was unable to stirr his cell,
I've had a chance to read Jeff's helpful slides [1] and have some
questions. But first I want to make sure I've gotten the basic points
right.
Here is my current understanding of Mills's theory (there are several
related ones going around). I am trying to understand the main points of
Mills's
From: Mike Carrell
Alan , BLP belongs to the chemical world, LENR= Low Energy Nuclear
Reactions, a whole different world.
This clearly defined kind of bifurcation is what Randell Mills and his
financial backers would dearly love for you to believe. It can mean billions
to them in
I agree with you, Jones. The hydrino or something like it allows LENR
to occur. The only variation in the various theories comes from how
this special state functions. Mills focuses only on creation of the
state, not its role in LENR, as you note. He took this stand early
even though he
I have read Conrad’s account of his experiments, which were very well done and
clearly demonstrated he phenomena Mills claimed when the Mills conditions were
met. His report was available on the BLP websitefor some time.
Mike Carrell
From: P.J van Noorden [mailto:pjvannoor...@caiway.nl]
From: Edmund Storms
Mills focuses only on creation of the state, not its role in
LENR... He took this stand early even though he saw and reported tritium
production because he did not want to get sucked in the rejection hole into
which LENR had
Jones, tritium is only produced when H is used, as Mills is doing. Use
of pure deuterium does not produce tritium while producing much more
energy. Mills needs to switch to deuterium, but if he did he would
have to admit he was causing a nuclear reaction. He has created a no
win situation.
Jeff,
I would be very surprised if the atom did not radiate energy under the
conditions demonstrated in your second link. A distant observer would see an E
field that is changing direction back and forth at the rotation rate. This is
exactly the behavior expected from a short dipole
I don't understand it, but it seems to be answered here - on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonradiation_condition
quoting from portions:
Classical nonradiation conditions define the conditions according to
classical electromagnetism under which a distribution of accelerating
charges
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
All they need to do to ensure that no radiation is emitted at a stable
orbital is to force the electrons to be distributed per above instead of
existing as a single moving point. If I recall correctly, those models do
Mills can hardly keep the transmutations secret forever. Is that what
is taking him so long . . . trying to get those nasty pollutants out
of his experiments to protect his theory? :-)
Secrets, what secrets? He has published profusely. What may be withheld is
know-how to optimize performance. There is a pervasive disbelief in his
findings and an itch to 'improve' on his methods and surprise when his
results are not seen. I have been at pains in my recent posts to identify
the
Sort of explains. More info than I have seen so far. See:
http://pesn.com/2014/01/20/9602425_Randell-Mills_explains_upcoming-Blacklight-power-demo/
From: Jed Rothwell
Sort of explains. More info than I have seen so far. See:
http://pesn.com/2014/01/20/9602425_Randell-Mills_explains_upcoming-Blackligh
t-power-demo/
What exactly will they be demonstrating on January 28?
Revealing quote: Mills clarified that it would not be
I tried to summarize a few reasons why I believe Randell Mills's theory of
the atom.
==
For decades, physicists have struggled with how to interpret the fine
structure constant, alpha = 1/137.035999
Physicist Richard Feynman said this decades ago: “It
Eric, if you are asking me this question, I would refer most of it to the Mills
experts. I am sorry if I mixed up the quantum theory with Mills' theory in
that post.
I was attempting to explain how the probabilistic location and movement of
electrons according to quantum mechanics is non
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 8:05 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Eric, if you are asking me this question, I would refer most of it to the
Mills experts. I am sorry if I mixed up the quantum theory with Mills'
theory in that post.
Ah, no doubt my mistake. The hypothesized
My bad.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Jan 20, 2014 11:13 pm
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 8:05 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Eric, if
I, like you would greatly appreciate a theory that is more classical and
deterministic. But, there is a great deal of human intellect and energy
involved in quantum theory and we must be careful before it can be abandoned.
It is our task to remain skeptical of a new theory and subject it to
I am very impressed. My initial suspicion has been bolstered that Mills has
developed a new version of the Papp engine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wankel_engine
It is a Wankel engine variation that has 60 reaction spaces that fire at
200 times a minute. That is a firing rate of 12,000
The reason that Papp moved away from water to noble gases was the corrosive
nature of water on his cylinder. This corrosion be a serious problem for
Mills. His machine will not function for long due to structural degradation
in his reaction spaces.
Experiments using hydrogen in the Papp cylinder
Not every photon which encounters an atom or ion will photoionize it. The
probability of photoionization is related to the photoionization
cross-section, which depends on the energy of the photon and the target
being considered. For photon energies below the ionization threshold, the
50 matches
Mail list logo
