Hope and persistence are two of the currencies of societies innovation and growth. If cutting edge researchers and movers dropped the ball every time a sceptic raises a point we would still see candles and campfires as the hight of civilization. Somethings gotta be happening here, especially within the well funded companies that have good reason not to release all the information at the moment. It will be released hopefully and praying the pressure catches us by surprise in it's suddeness.
Display MoreYou should not engage in discussion with simple minded people that only know right & wrong. The question always is the same: Where are the limits of a model. Is a QM/QED derived hamiltonian with 7th order terms with fantasy gauging still QM/QED/QCD or a desperate try to rescue it? You have to understand that 100000 physicists did work for more than 90 years now and they still cannot calculate anything based on a first order measurement as being the mass of e,p,n or an isotope or the electron g-factor or the magnetic moments of e,p (n). All these quantities are known with 10 digits precision and destroy any QM/QED/QFT formula for dense matter that tries to relate them.
Mills biggest achievement is the electron g-factor something impossible to do with QM.
The QED/QFT fraudster tried to derived it from 20000 Feynman loops all handcrafted gauged underlaid with a pseudo infinite sequence to avoid rounding errors...
I need not to mention here that "some" weights they used for their loops are pretty unknown as they are measurement based with less than 3 digit precision...
Bankers that did the same have names like Madoff...
But many things of Mills e.g. hydrogen spectrum are based on the same math as QM uses - of course QM needs to use Maxwell (3D waves) too...Other things like Mills electron model (disk..) are not very helpful (missing 4D) or the 4-He model contains some tiny cheats like the wrong reduced mass. I could give a long list of minor problems that compared to the basic failure of QM not being able to make first order derivations are small.
Nevertheless: If I had to model an "electron gas" in a conductor, transistor etc, then I would use QM because it is a good model for tiny perturbations. It's never a question of right or wrong. The question is: What is adequate?
Mills certainly is brilliant but sometimes brilliant people make brilliant errors and are not able to concede them.
Morality (right and wrong) is a matter of a human's behavior, social responsibility as decision making as related to devine/spiritual perpose and a higher power. Not applying to theoretical physics! It's just a spectrum of accuracy!