The forces are different by 10*36, so comparisons are impossible to measure.
________________________________ From: John Berry <berry.joh...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 3:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:No mass !?! Dirac electrons >From the patent... "a free electron has inertial mass but not gravitational >mass." and "Thus, a free electron is not gravitationally attracted to >ordinary matter. " Really? Can that really add up? Pretty sure this is not very much in agreement with conventional theory. John Berry On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 3:53 AM, JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote: Bob, There is a fair amount of both brilliance (cough, cough) and silliness in Mills hand-waving. His misidentification of the Higgs boson is in the later category. As for the “antigravity electron” see his patent app (thanks to the spice man for this) Patent WO1995032021A1 - Apparatus and method for providing an antigravitational force<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fpatents%2FWO1995032021A1&data=02%7C01%7C%7Caad74bcab3c84067bd5d08d567bf0a75%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636528992563255477&sdata=CVajWd%2FfT3TNJimv4xUvPE9IvIomeZDXpygX5w1Pe6s%3D&reserved=0> The bigger question is: if this antigravity claim works why has NASA and the Pentagon ignoredthemt? And while we are at it: Why did NASA drop the hydrino rocket? BLP did not even get to Phase two on that one. Where is the CIHT battery? Where is the reverse gyrotron? Plus, in spite of his own genius - Mills fails to give Dirac and other credit and ignores emerging findings in physics when he cannot adequately rationalize them into his so-called classical view..A fair appraisal is that he is a creative genius on paper, but a lousy inventor. He simply cannot put good ideas into practice, despite throwing $150 million (or more) at the problem. He is great fund-raiser but after all these years there is not a satisfactory independent replication, nor a real sample of hydrinos to test. The sun-cell will most likely be yet another failure in this long list. If so, he will move on to the next round of funding without a real explanation of why it failed. Hopefully, in a few years other will be able to push Holmlid’s similar work into practice. All Mills can do then is to say “told you so” and claim to have been the first … From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com> For a nice qualitative summary of Mill’s theory see the following link: http://www.brettholverstott.com/annoucements/2017/8/5/summary-of-randell-millss-unified-theory<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.brettholverstott.com%2Fannoucements%2F2017%2F8%2F5%2Fsummary-of-randell-millss-unified-theory&data=02%7C01%7C%7Caad74bcab3c84067bd5d08d567bf0a75%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636528992563255477&sdata=dBvPTomnEssGfRwgi080V2hRCp3eoSDmhFxIdwkK9Lw%3D&reserved=0>
