I renamed this thread cuz I'd like to hear opinions as to WHY an engineer 
succeeded where ALL the
scientists failed in optimizing the excess heat and controllability of whatever 
this reaction is???
 
In our conversation about Mills/BLP, Peter wrote:
"His theory is OK, verified by experiment."
 
But an 'engineer' (i.e., someone not real knowledgeable about theoretical 
foundations) optimized the
excess heat effect and controllability of the reaction in only a few years and 
with very little
money compared to BLP (20 years and $60M)...
 
So either Mills' theory has serious errors or holes, or they have incompetent 
scientists/engineering
managers who are making bad decisions as to what tests/experiments to do, thus 
wasting alot of time
and not achieving true UNDERSTANDING of what variables affect the reaction.
 
If Mills' theories were accurate, then optimizing/manipulating the reaction 
mechanisms would have
happened by now... and they would have beat Rossi to the market.  What's more 
likely is that the
conclusions that come out of Mills' theories have caused them to go down 
numerous 'dead-ends'... and
Mills' ego refuses to acknowledge that his theory needs some serious revisions. 

-Mark

  _____  

From: Peter Gluck [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2011 11:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?


The reason is, in my opinion, that is very difficult to achieve 
a CONTINUOUS generation of energy- see my paper
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/04/questions-preparing-swot-analysis-of-ni.html
 what
conditions are necessary for a new source of energy.

But I think this year (good for new energy, it seems) Randy will be on the 
market with his CIHT
technology.
His theory is OK, verified by experiment. Technology is more difficult than 
scientific experiments.
Peter
 
<http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/04/questions-preparing-swot-analysis-of-ni.html>
 


On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Mark Iverson <[email protected]> wrote:


I would wager that the reason Mills hasn't got a commercial device, after 20 
years and $60M, is
because his theory is flawed...

-Mark



  _____  

From: Peter Gluck [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2011 9:46 PM 

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?


Perhaps the best person to discuss your hydrino ideas is Randy Mills himself. 
 




-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck 
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Reply via email to