At least give some praise where it's due... it's pretty difficult to caricature a caricature.
Validation of Randell Mills GUTCP - a call for action
-
-
In view of the LENRpenic nature of the news...here's a morsel to discuss or alternatively ...
MYpersonalise....
Realistic appraisal from German Brlp watcher
from yahoo SocClassphys
"
That is correct. But from the available imformation it is pretty obvious that a high power long time output has not been achieved yet. And I am pretty sure this will not happen this year. For the closed cell to operate a few hours everything has to work together in a machine nobody build before.
My guess is that they are going to identify the main problems until christmas this year and by october next year they will know if they have to redesign major parts of the suncell. Engineering is a pretty hard task - especially when dealing with many unknowns. Everyone here wants fast progress, but you have to be realistic about the expectations. Of course there is the timeline published last year, but this was more or less based on the engineering of the suncell parts from the external engineering partners.
__._,_.___
Posted by: [email protected]
-
Everyone wants fast progress? How about NO progress in more than 20 years? Is progress in that period of time asking too much for you? How about all the lying predictions made during that time and all the deceptive statements?
QuoteOf course there is the timeline published last year,
How about the two year time line published almost twenty years ago? How about the power companies that were jumping on board to be the first? Forgot that already? What does it require for you to know you're being bullshifted?!
-
"bullshifted"
157 minutes to MYpersonalization. a bit slow. I am sure a MYbot can be quicker and more accurate.
Suhas test put back to September
2018 for Mills...
Looks like I might fork out AU$3200 for a 3KW solar panel/inverter setup
Electricity price edging up to 35 c/KWh in the current climate-change weather.
Payback period still only 6.06 years though..
the shiny panels look so bright and politically correct
-
Payback period still only 6.06 years though..
17% interest is pretty good.
-
17% interest is pretty good.
I think it was John Lennon who once said that life is what happens when you are making other plans.
A lot of people (myself included at times) have been looking for an energy miracle. And yet Elon Musk has been focused for years on his 3 point plan - electric cars, battery storage, and rooftop solar. People still knock the sh*t out of him and say he is just making toys for the rich that will never achieve the energy efficiency and cost to make a real difference. But here he still is trudging along year after year, starting mass production of the Model 3, developing rooftop solar shingles with much improved efficiency, and Tesla Powerwalls that are getting less expensive and storing more energy. Is the story that many are waiting for already happening? Maybe solar, batteries and electric cars are the answer. Time will tell. Musk is world famous and worth $10 billion. So he must be on to something.
-
5 reasons that solar panels/inverters are getting cheaper .. C H I N A.
environmental consequences in CHINA unknown.
-
Quote
"bullshifted"
157 minutes to MYpersonalization. a bit slow. I am sure a MYbot can be quicker and more accurate.
Persuasive argument for Mills. You should send it to him.
-
Randell Mills latest communication from SocClassPhys yahoo
"I am not using a theory such as quantum theory, string theory, big bang theory, QED theory ….infinite number of BS theories. I am using physical laws.
The engineering is going great. I am bangIng out more patents at this moment. I will share the progress when I can. "
-
Randell Mills latest communication from SocClassPhys yahoo
"I am not using a theory such as quantum theory, string theory, big bang theory, QED theory ….infinite number of BS theories. I am using physical laws.
The engineering is going great. I am bangIng out more patents at this moment. I will share the progress when I can. "
Mills sounds like he is aggravated and put upon by stupidities. Are people asking him stupid questions like what science does he beleive in?
-
Mills has put up with stupidities for over thirty years... sounds like he has almost engineered a final solution to them
-
Quote
Mills sounds like he is aggravated and put upon by stupidities. Are people asking him stupid questions like what science does he beleive in?
I suspected he is more aggravated by stupid questions like, "when, after twenty years of empty promises and meaningless demonstrations, are you actually going to show something that works and can be independently and properly tested?"
-
I suspected he is more aggravated by stupid questions like, "when, after twenty years of empty promises and meaningless demonstrations, are you actually going to show something that works and can be independently and properly tested?"
Mills is like you Mary, he pushes forward relentlessly without pause and discouragement in maximum overdrive. Of all people. don't you recognize a irrepressible fanatic when you see one.
-
A few major differences
Randell Mills is a real person... MY is a persona
Randell Mills hasGUTCP and exptal publications and patents.. the MYpersona has posting on LENR forum only.
-
Perhaps so, bocijn. But I am not the one claiming miracles which contradict known and well proven physics. And I am not the one promising free energy for decades and delivering... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING but worthless and meaningless razzle dazzle "demonstrations."
-
How does he contradict known and well proven physics when his GUTCP is built on them?
-
Bocijn,
I am getting little disappointed in Mills. The last 6 months he has been hot, starting off the New Year with a 5 minute CNN segment, roadshows, college symposiums, and making definitive marketing timelines in months...not years, but I detect a backing off recently.
Can't help but wondering if his active public cycles, coincide with a need for more funding? Once he gets it, back to normal. I could say almost the same thing about BEC, yet they do not have BrLP's respectable list of independent verifications.
What do you think?
-
Definitely Mills has to keep his investors happy,
If I was one.. I'd be anxious
I'll give Mills another 6 months before investing in $3000 for 3KW solar cells
Cost-effective and safe engineering is not easy.. incandescent,fluorescent and LED lights
all three took decades to develop from concept.
and the 1 MW Suncell is seriously more dangerous than these lightbulbs or smartphones
I'm not sure how many fires were recorded with the early lightbulbs
.. Samsung has had fires.
Mills doesn't seem to have a lot of competition apart from solar
2054 expected functional date for the ITER in France..
at 99 years old I will be preparing for another journey.
So around January I might be putting in solar.
And knowing my luck the functional Suncell will be announced in February
which will make energy prices and solar justification both dive.
-
I am not quite sure what you are implying. Are you saying that Mills presents his results in the best looking way to secure funding? In my eyes this is a necessity if you cannot finance yourself. I am presenting my work results in the best possible way, aswell as my boss and his boss. You are also doing it on your website - there are probably a lot of things that still dont work in your theory framework.
hi, my understanding comes from being a reverse-engineer, which is my primary area of expertise that i have been applying for 31 years to develop a particle physics theory (the extended rishon model) and also to understand Dr Mill's motivation. Dr Mill's early career is in NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance). he pioneered many absolutely ground-breaking techniques that hugely improved the accuracy of NMR scans, and his work in this field is extremely well-recognised.
i believe it reasonable to hypothesise that the incredibly strong magnetic forces involved in NMR would have been an extremely good litmus test, throwing up errors in his early pioneering theoretical work that, under "normal" E.M. field strength circumstances, would not even have been detected.
the short version is: if he is looking to scam people there are much better ways to do it that take 5e-1th the amount of time and require 1e-5th the amount of technical knowledge for people to "believe".
the peer-reviewed scientific community basically has themselves to blame for this situation. he is a Medical Doctor. Medical Doctors who approach Particle Physicists and say " i have a theory which ties light and optics and particles together" tend to get shunted aside and told to go to speak to people in the field of optics. If they speak to anyone in the field of optics, they are told "oh I am sorry this is a particle physics theory it could not possibly involve any mathematical equations from the field of optics".
however as he is an intelligent person he would not have given up, and would have carried on regardless. however with each paper would have come a further and further distancing from the peer-reviewed scientific community. have you ever tried to get a paper published in a journal? try it some time - it is quite... informative. i personally have given up and now self-publish on vixra.
so he would have had a rather hard time endeavouring to get funding for even the research, and would have had to find some practical "business" related way to get it out there. that would have meant two things:
1 getting enough research done to be able - to his OWN satisfaction and that of his team - to honestly be able to understand the theory enough to put it into practice... SAFELY. remember, the BLP stuff is about releasing the power equivalent to the SUN in an unbelievably small amount of time!
2 *SHORT-CIRCUITING* the publication process, leaving behind a trail of unfinished work and potential errors and plenty of room for misunderstandings, but at the same time being JUST enough for the primary funding goal to be accepted on the basis of "informal" independent reviews.
all that aside: the primary mistake that i have spotted - the purpose behind joining this forum - is to invite people to help correct the error in Dr Randall Mill's understanding of the proton. on one of the diagrams he outlines the three quarks as being at 120 degrees. this is a fundamental and key mistake that interestingly does not likely change the "external" formulae (the summation of the EM fields of the three quarks) but this mistake *does* mean that it is impossible to extend Dr Mill's work downwards or any further into the field of High-Energy Particle Physics.
by changing the angles to 90 degrees the superposition (phasor sums) work perfectly and harmoniously... and all is well. that's the theory, anyway. i have set up an open wiki (registration best done by username + password) and enabled teximg conversion so that anyone who wishes to participate in proving this may *openly* do so.
apologies this is a long thread, here, i am catching up, as you can see i have got to page 2...
-
Mills theory is based on Heaviside's form of equations, so I would guess, that the quaternion form could make the non-radiative condition (which Mills hydrino model depends on) less probable.
any particle physics theory which does *not* have a non-radiating condition as its absolute fundamental bedrock has to, by definition, be either simply be accidentally *missing* the explicit mention of such a condition, or, conversely, must be fatally flawed.
there is no escaping this.
how can that conclusion be reached?
well, it's very very simple. if any theory involving energy within particles does *not* have such a non-radiating condition, then by definition ENERGY CAN AND WILL ESCAPE. particles do not deflate like balloons, going "pfffhhhhhtttthhhblblblbl" until they no longer exist. therefore, by virtue of the fact that if you stare at any physical object it does not change (except if it's radioactive), we can *categorically* conclude - undeniably - that any theory which does not recognise this is... basically fundamentally wrong.
apologies if that logic is a bit... strongly-worded. it's also deliberately humourously-worded. if anyone can spot any flaws in the logic please do say so.
