I just finished with Robin and I find some of the same ideas here form
Jones. (Deep breath) here we go again:
<snip>
Instead the really frustrating information is the tantalizing stuff which
appears from brilliant, well funded, probably genius-level researchers like
Mills/BLP who will publish tantalizing bits of apparently apocryphal (at
least certainly unattainable in the short run) speculation, but cannot
produce any real evidence to back it up, and then have the gall to claim
"independent verification" when everyone who tries to duplicate it fails.
MC: Jones, I thought you were more perceptive than "everyone who tries to
duplicate it fails" Who, precisely? Are you referring to the JAP paper the
purportedly repeated Mills' H-Ar plasma runs without seeing the Balmer line
broadening? Did you not follow my discussion of this on HSG,wherein I quoted
Mills that conditions cited (pulsed high power exicitation) had not worked
for him either. What Mills used was lower CW excitation, which did work, but
that is not what the others did. They failed by not actually duplicating
what Mills did, which is clearly spelled out in his own paper.
MC: Duplication of Mills work is found in the Phillips papers and that of
Conrads in Germany. Mills' name is on these papers as junior author as
courtesy. That does not invalidate the work. I have also read the Master's
thesis of Dr, Jansson, of Rowan University, which consisted of his own test
of the BLP phenomenon using a calorimater from BLP.
More on the hydrino battery at the end.
But first, to consolidate two postings on Mills into one:
In case you were wondering:
How heavy is everything:
The initial mass of the Universe based on the size, age,
Hubble constant, temperature, density of matter, and power spectrum is
2 X 10^54 kg... give or take a few ounces
How old is the universe? Infinitely old, as it oscillates on
a long cycle but never collapses all the way:
Thus, the observed Universe will expand as mass is released
as photons for ~500,000,000,000 years to its maximum radius
of 2x10^12 light years.. At that point in its world-line,
the Universe will obtain its maximum size and begin to
contract to its minimum radius of ~3x10^11 light years
Immodest Conclusion: all from this TOE by Randall Mills
Maxwell's equations, Planck's equation, the de Broglie
equation, Newton's laws, and Special, and General Relativity
are now Unified..
If you have the time to download this amazing document, along with some very
nice visualizations, over 100 pages and a tasty mixed-grill... then by all
means, indulge yourself. There is a lot of potentially brilliant information
here, mixed in with lots of potential BS. Caveat Lector. But remember, if
you do not adequately separate the wheat from the chafe... well, you get the
extra fiber, so that is not all bad, and helps keep you 'regular'...this is
mostly new from the BLP site.
MC: One can make a clear distiction, as I have, from Mills' TOE and the body
of experimental work based on the so-called "sub quantum" stae of the
hydrogen atom. Mills' papers in senior journals, and his latest patent
application, do not depend on the orbitsphere model, now well illustrated on
the website.
http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/Theory%20Pres%20020905%20std%202.pdf
To me, one of the more interesting images in this new material is the OS
(orbitsphere) which now looks like a truncated sphere with both ends
missing. Not what I had been thinking.
Here is the tantalizing bit (not new, but certainly relevant to current
threads on vortex about how to best way to store energy, especially wind and
solar), for which Mills appears to be claiming as fact certain evidence
which he has not produced, despite many appeals, and therefore likely cannot
produce any time soon... but he hasn't removed or qualified the claims:
Battery Comparison (from the BLP site)
The energy density projection for BLP's battery is as high as 10,000+
watt-hours per kilogram. The voltage of BLP's battery may be 70 volts
compared to the average voltage for a lithium-ion battery of 3.6 volts.
BLP's battery compound may release about 100 times the energy and 1,000 plus
times the power of any other conventional chemical used in batteries.
If Mills could better document this, as well as many other of his claims, of
if anyone could reproduce them independently there would be... not millions,
not even a few billion, but tens of billions of dollars available to develop
the whole works. Instead, what do we have? More fancy papers and more
vacuous claims.
At some point after 15 years of excuses, even his apologists are going to
have to drop the spiel that "these things always take longer to develop then
people realize," and ask themselves why, if there is any truth to it, that
the public should not demand government intervention, due to global warming
and the impending crisis of artic methane poisoning, etc and commandeer this
research (and pay Mills its worth, of course, after that has been
determined) and incorporate it into a new Manhattan project.
If Mills claims were true, and there are growing doubts from many former
supporters, then the impending environmental crisis makes it that
important... that we by-pass the reluctant inventor and get some real action
going, rather than just more rhetoric and fancier papers and pdf
presentations.
MC: I have already responded to this in Robin's post, and will not repeat it
here.
Mike Carrell
