Randell Mills GUT - Who can do the calculations?

  • I'll let you know what Dr. Mills says. Or you can just join us at The Society For Classical Physics. Sorry if I came off as a jerk, you seem to be obviously willing to take an honest look at the theory.


    Furthermore, not all parts of the theory are fully fleshed out as you can see, but what it does predict it does so with extreme accuracy and within the confines of classical physics and fundamental constants. There is room to make original contributions to the theory.


    I suggested the design of using liquid electrodes last year on the forum to isolate the energetic transition reactions from the solid parts of the reactor and prevent them from melting or vaporizing. This was prior to revealing any liquid fuel injection or liquid electrodes being used in the latest design revealed last week.


  • The vaporized silver provides the conductive matrix, the heat provides the kinetic energy to the reactants which are catalyst and atomic hydrogen.


    The kinetic energy is what is responsible for initiating the transition reactions (specifically dipole/multipole resonant collisions destabilizing the orbitsphere causing radial acceleration and release of electric potential between electron and proton). If the plasma wasn't contained within the pressure vessel the conditions conducive to the reactions would not persist. The current is mainly to alleviate charge buildup and to provide the initial kinetic energy to the reactants.


    The energy obviously comes from the transition reactions which are releasing ~100 or more eVs per event depending on which fractional state is being catalyzed. There could likely even be disproportionation occurring which is when hydrinos collide and drop to even lower energy levels. This also likely occurs within the corona of our star.


    If the plasma wasn't confined somehow, it would simply dissipate.


    Even in single shot open air tests three years ago the plasma persisted much longer after current ceased to flow which current theory cannot explain. In all cases there is no high field, only a maximum of 5 volts.


    Why not just go on the forum and ask Dr. Mills directly?

  • If the magic is in the kinetic energy and not in the driving electric current, then the hydrino reaction can spread over N numbers of silver fountains...say 100 electrode sets...an electrode array where the reaction in one electrode set can activate the reaction in many other electrode sets that are nearby the prime driver set.

  • I meant according to the current mainstream physics paradigm, it is explained using classical physics (GUTCP) as I have described above.


    I don't claim to be the world's authority on GUTCP but I think I got the major points mostly right. Again, Dr. Mills doesn't mind answering questions on his Society for Classical Physics forum. We interact with him on a daily basis pretty much.


    Also I wasn't sure if you were being sarcastic with your prior posts, but look at what happens in the corona of the Sun. If GUTCP is right, disproportionation hydrino reactions occur on a massive scale providing the high energy photons to produce the ionized species of elements observed in the spectrum, not millions of degrees temperature as is currently assumed.

  • @stefan
    You asked about the relationship between GUTCP and QM. I think Mills had the same question and has a first answer and gives its derivation from p11 ff. His conclusion:
    “Thus the mathematical relationship of GUTCP and QM is based on the Fourier transform of the redial function. GUTCP requires that the electron is real and physically confined to a two dimensional surface comprising source currents that match the wave equation solutions for spherical waves in two dimensions (angular) and time. The corresponding Fourier transform is a wave over all space that is a solution of the three dimensional wave equation (ev.g. the Schrödinger equation). In essence, QM may be considered as a theory dealing with the Fourier transform of an electron, rather than the physical electron. By Parsevals theorem, the energies may be equivalent, but the quantum mechanical case is nonphysical – only mathematical. It may mathematically produce numbers that agree with experimental energies as eigenvalues, but the mechanisms lack internal consistency and conformity with physical laws. ”


    This is a quite a remarcable result.


    @ Eric
    Sorry for my strong wording. I think I adopted the verbally strong position of some of the people posting in this thread :-) .
    To your question:
    I am no expert so I am talking about my current understanding of the process of pair production and the fine structure constant: Of course the electron is not moving with lightspeed. 1/alpha is the fraction where the electron would have the velocity c and because this is not possible (because GUTCP relies on special relativity as one of its foundations) the last permitted orbit is a fraction of 1/137. Orbit 1/138 would result in an electron velocity greater than c. And in between the pair production process happens. This transition state orbitosphere is not a traditional orbit of the electron but rather a short living state where (in the case Driscoll describes) the photon wave (photon orbitosphere) changes to become an electron and a positron. To get an impression of how this might work I think one has to see the animations of the fields of the photon and the free electron. I think they are somethere on BLPs page.


    To your other question regarding my two links: they are linked to Mills equations because they use the nonradiation condition to construct models for electrons. The paper from 1990 is interesting because they use a simple ad hoc nonradiation condition for the simplest case. Then they solve maxwells equations for their simple nonradiation condition and can show that the electron can have a stable orbit and directly show that the spin is a direct physical consequence of their solution and not “inherent” as in QM. They are completely unrelated to Mills but basically had the same idea and could produce a small part of Mills result. Instead of the ad hoc simples nonradiation condition Mills took the general case and as a model of the electron he used the 2D wave equation. Btw. this also shows that Mills is not randomly putting numbers together – because these guys got the same result as Mills at least for the spin.
    And the other paper shows that it is possible to construct not only the electron but other particles with this nonradiation condition so that they are stable – it is more or less a proof/indication that Mills model does not violate any accepted law of nature (Maxwell, Newton) and gives stable models for atoms.

  • In regards to Epimetheus's post above, I can't remember where I read it, it was either on the forum or in Brett's book, but apparently many years ago, Hermann Haus told Dr. Mills privately that he had correctly solved for the structure of the electron classically. At the time he did not wish to make "waves" so to speak through public acknowledgement.


    In regards to K-Capture Eric seems to be asking specifically about the case of capture of the inner shell; I've posted a question on the other forum so we'll see what Dr. Mills says.

  • Here's what Dr. Mills posted. Probably not as much information as you would have liked but you can always prod him for more detail on the forum.


    Also GUTCP theorizes that excited states are due to photons expressing "effective charge" and shielding the electron to a degree from the central field of the proton. I guess if one accepts that a high energy photon can convert into an electron and positron the idea of photons in certain situations expressing effective charge isn't all that strange. I'm not sure how to relate this to K-capture but just thought I'd mention it.


    Randy MillsToday at 5:12 AM
    K capture can only occur if the reaction can form a more stable nucleus. A proton cannot undergo K-capure for example.

  • Mills states as follows:


    Quote

    Mills has trademarked “Hydrino.” And because his issued patents claim the hydrino as an invention, BLP asserts that it owns all intellectual property rights involving hydrino research. BLP therefore forbids outside experimentalists from doing even the most basic hydrino research, which could confirm or deny hydrinos, without first signing an IP agreement. “We welcome research partners; we want to get others involved,” Mills says. “But we do need to protect our technology.”



    The insulator-metal transition in hydrogen


    http://www.pnas.org/content/107/29/12743.full[/quote]




    Very high temperature shock wave methods might make metalize hydrogen obtainable.



    This transition from molecular liquid to atomic liquid is called the PPT (discussed below). Leif Holmlid uses a quantum mechanics process called Rydberg blockade to produce metalized hydrogen where a Rydberg matter substance like potassium is used as a QM template to reform the atomic structure of hydrogen into the low orbit based liquid matalized form.



    Quote

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallic_hydrogen


    Shahriar Badiei and Leif Holmlid from the University of Gothenburg have shown in 2004 that condensed metallic states made of excited hydrogen atoms (Rydberg matter) are effective promoters to metallic hydrogen.*


    * A phase of hydrogen Rydberg matter (RM) is formed in ultra-high vacuum by desorption of hydrogen from an alkali promoted RM emitter (Holmlid 2002 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 14 13469). The RM phase is studied by pulsed laser-induced Coulomb explosions which is the best method for detailed studies of the RM clusters. This method gives direct information about the bonding distances in RM from the kinetic energy release in the explosions. At pressures >10-6 mbar hydrogen, H* Rydberg atoms are released with an energy of 9.4 eV. This gives a bonding distance of 150 ± 8 pm which corresponds to a metallic phase of atomic hydrogen using the results by Chau et al (2003 Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 245501). The results indicate that a partial 3D structure is formed.

    I beleive that there are other theories that have been accepted by science that explain below base hydrogen orbits; specifically metalized hydrogen. High pressure physics is directed at producing metalized hydrogen as its major goal. [/quote]




    All the experimental data that Mills has accumulated may very well be consistent with high temperature shock wave produced PPT hydrogen.


    From Holmlid



    Quote

    Instead of inverted Rydberg matter, it is spin-based Rydberg matter with orbital angular momentum l = 0 for the electrons. It is shown to be both superfluid4 and superconductive (Meissner effect observed) at room temperature.6,7 The measured H–H distances are short, normally 2.3 pm.1,3,9 Several spin states with different internuclear distances exist.3 It is likely that the main process initiated by the impinging laser pulse is a transition from level s = 2 with H–H distance of 2.3 pm, to level s = 1 with theoretical distance 0.56 pm. At this distance, nuclear reactions are spontaneous and laser-induced nuclear processes are thus relatively easy to start.

  • @Epimetheus


    I don't understand this connection, the radial solutions are essentially Laguerre polynomials + exponential for Shrödingers equation of hydrogene and
    in the derivation you gave me he uses spherical bessel functions as a radial function. So I can't follow this line of thoughts. But it is true that the fourier
    transform with spherical bessel functions for the radial part indeed fourier transform into Mills charge distribution.


    Regards
    Stefan

  • Has anyone worked through Appendix I to the point they feel comfortable with the derivations? I'm mostly OK with it (except for the discussion of the H() and G() functions). However, the conclusion uses some terms that aren't well explained. While I *think* I understand these, can anyone take a crack at providing a more intuitive justification behind the highlighted equations? Exactly what is represented by the cross-product s_n * v_n? Is omega_n the angular frequency of the emitted photon? I think s_n is the spatial frequency expressed in rad/m, and v_n is a velocity in m/sec of the current density. And radiation requires that the cross product of the two at some point on the orbitsphere is equal to the photon's wavelength. Am I understanding this correctly?

  • I think that in order to understand a proof of this you should in stead of the taken path, expand the plane wave in the fourier transform
    into a sum of spherical bessel functions and spherical harmonics, the sum will cancel almost all terms but a single bessel and spherical
    harmonic that match the same quantum number of the Mills charge distribution due to orthogonality. You will end up with the fourier transform being:


    (*) j_l(|s|r) Y_lm(theta,phi)


    Which is much better because the stated equation (38) in Mills takes convolution with all factors except the last having s. You just can't show that
    this expression dissapears because of the property of the convolution. now for a specific w0 |s| has a certain magnitude for light like wave numbers
    and hence r can be chooses so that (*) e.g. |s|r represents a zero of the spherical bessel function and (*) is shown to be zero for all light like s,w.


    To understand everything that is written is hard though. In all to motivate the non radiation one only needs a half of page I think and could keep
    it much much simpler than whats written in the book.


    Regards
    Stefan

  • To further explain and highlight that the key to proper mathematical understanding of Mills theory is the expansion of plane waves in various ways.


    We have a photon inside the atom that is trapped. Consider the superpositioning of EM plane waves assume that the wave vectors of all the plane waves are evenly distributed e.g. they live on a sphere with constant radi. Again the theorem where you expand the plane wave in bessel function and spherical harmoics apply and we get the explicit solution of the electrical potential as

    ~ j_0(|r|w/c)exp(i w t), r = sqrt(x^2+y^2+z^2)


    j_0(x) = sin(x)/x and hence |r|w/c = 2pi for a zero
    <=> |r|2 pi f / c = 2 pi
    <=> |r| 1/(1/f c) = 1
    <=> |r| 1 / (T c) = 1
    <=> |r| / lambda = 1
    <=> |r| = lambda


    So the lambda of the trapped photon has to be the same as the radi as described in option geeks post above.

  • Mills has trademarked “Hydrino.” And because his issued patents claim the hydrino as an invention, BLP asserts that it owns all intellectual property rights involving hydrino research. BLP therefore forbids outside experimentalists from doing even the most basic hydrino research, which could confirm or deny hydrinos, without first signing an IP agreement. “We welcome research partners; we want to get others involved,” Mills says. “But we do need to protect our technology.”


    What utter nonsense. Even Randall Mills can't patent physics, and how could he possibly forbid someone else from experimenting? Is he planning to put a copyright tag on each and every hydrino?


    ETA. Next step, GE patent the electron and forbid anyone else using 'pirate' versions.

  • Read the paper that the jack booted thugs at BLP don't want you to see.


    https://cirworld.com/index.php/jap/article/view/2684/2674


    The fact that BLP tries to suppress basic scientific research only means they are not worthy of our attention. Any organization which would send a cease and desist letter to a replicator (who is not seeking to commercialize the technology) is not worthy of existing. My hope is that LENR technologies -- which produce millions of eV per reaction -- arrive on the market soon and cause BLP to lose all future funding.

  • What do you want to tell us? That paper sees indications for unusual development of bright light as claimed by Mills. This is more supportive for Mills theory than the opposite. But regarding an independent validation I find the papers of world class plasma physicist like Kroesen and Conrads much more compelling:
    Conrads, H, R Mills, and Th Wrubel. (2003) “Emission in the deep vacuum ultraviolet from a plasma formed by incandescently heating hydrogen gas with trace amounts of potassium carbonate.” Plasma Sources Sci Technol 12: 389–395.
    Driessen, N. M., E. M. van Veldhuizen, P. Van Noorden, R. J. L. J. De Regt, and G. M. W. Kroesen. (2005) “Balmer-alpha line broadening analysis of incandescently heated hydrogen plasmas with potassium catalyst.” In XXVIIth ICPIG, Eindoven, the Netherlands. 18-22 July.


    I´m not your opinion that the cease and desist letter has anything to say. It just tells me that after Rossi we have another guy who is totally scared to lose the race against the competitors. Mills wants to make a lot of money and he owes his private investors a huge return of investment. He also needs money to start some new companies that have other products predicted by GUTCP in their focus. And of course he wants to sue the a$$ of everyone who harmed his credibility like Wikipedia, Rathke, etc.


    Being the lone wolf can make you a bit weird. In my eyes Mills is way ahead of Rossi regarding basic decent human behavior.

  • Randell Mills is not a decent human being. As I said in my previous post, he is a thug. Andrea Rossi, despite his less than complete honesty and straightforwardness, has never attempted to sue those who performed replications of his technology. He never sent cease and desist letters to Parkhomov, Songsheng, Stepanov, Alan Smith, and a dozen other individuals. Why? Because Andrea Rossi realizes that attempting to prohibit, under threat of litigation, basic scientific research is absolutely repugnant. It's not simply bad, but the polar opposite of the open source movement.


    Basically, he is claiming that trying to replicate a scientific phenomenon (in this case the reality of the hydrino) is something no one has the right to do unless they sign up with his company. No one has any duty or obligation whatsoever to ask his permission or sign any document with Black Light Power before performing not-for-profit research. He's basically trying to be the dictator of an entire branch of science which he has no right to be. But even if he was trying, his dictatorship is a flop. After decades of research and making huge claims and pronouncements about a dozen different variations of their technology, the best he can come up with is a giant Rube Goldberg device. Even if his figures and those of his validation team are confirmed, it will be many years before a SunCell would be robust enough to operate for many months or years in an industrial setting.


    LENR has him beat and he knows it due to the very basic physics involved. His technology isn't really somewhere between nuclear and chemical. That is like saying, "the speed of me on my bicycle is somewhere between a turtle and an ICBM." And if you notice, he doesn't even speak about his beloved "hydrino hydrides" anymore. He used to brag about them. Waving tubes of multi-colored crystals he'd claim they had all sorts of amazing properties. Now they have vanished.


    My hope is that Black Light Power folds in short order. I would hope the same for any company or organization that would threaten a lawsuit over a simple replication attempt. We've had enough petty, arrogant dictators on this planet -- they've been responsible for all sorts of atrocities. We definitely don't need them in science.