Posts by RobertBryant

    Randell Mills

    Suncell Q+AFresno Uni. 27 Feb 2016



    Kinetics roadblock overcome in October,2013. January jelly beans mass manufacture stage starts January 2018?


    Interesting question. about 1 hr 25 min timemark

    How it calculate masses?


    The answer!!! some of it I can follow but I get lost not the end of it


    "Sun is a dimple in space-time converting 5 billion kg/of matter into energy per sec

    Fundamental equation is E=mc2=c3/4pi G

    So the Matter converts into energy and spacetime expands as matter converts into energy

    If you add up the 400 billion galaxies /stars on average it gives you the Hubble Constant"


    after that I get lost

    Schwartzchild metric..


    By the way for Axil

    surface plasmotrons are fitted into GUTCP here, somehow .. in Randells double slit expt explanation . Pg 157 by Jeff Driscoll


    zhydrogen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/BLP-e-4-25-2016.pdf

    Its all the fault of cheap energy.

    What will 7 billion human beings do on this planet when there is no more need for manpower.

    Will they just exchange ad hominems over the net and not even bother to have a punchup.

    And now Mills promises energy at about 1c per kilowatthr next year


    what we need is to bring back wood burning

    There would be full employment in no time and world full of smoke


    but I won't be sharpening up my scythe to cut the lawn any time soon

    We can't turn back the sundial

    Wyttenbach said about Mills

    "But at that level it's a small step to 4He. But he will never tell you this, because this would "void" his IP...


    The Sun cell energy change level reported by Mills at at 340 EV per /H Atom or (240 times the enthalpy change for combustion)

    would give you a lot more kilometres/litre of Hydrogen than the Toyota Mirai



    Its also over ~300x the enthalpy change for TNT combustion .. ( on a per 1 amu=1H atom) basis

    But it is still a large step(~3000x) away from 1MEV.


    Perhaps it much more easy to get the hydrino energy levels through the patent process than getting

    fusion/transmutation levels thru.

    Axil: I am only a beginner but I want to let my inner polaritron to go free.

    But can I?

    Apparently polaritrons from this reference are confined onto solid surfaces /crystal supports,

    but are not free. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polariton


    From reading the reference you gave me plasmons= polaritrons can be generated by visible and uv frequency.

    My interpretation from https://www.researchgate.net/p…t_and_glimpse_into_future

    Surface plasmons/polaritons if they exist may be involved in the generation of charge clusters.

    The article mentions that the exciting frequency is in the visible(400-700) spectrum for Ag/Au but can be UV (~140 nm) for Aluminium

    Silver has a better Q, “quality factor” than gold (80 versus 15 at exciting frequency corresponding to 700nm)

    “Silver is a better plasmonic metal than gold” the reference states.. also..

    a large energy amplification of input energy intensity is modelled for silver nanospheres as ~600.


    For generation of photoelectrons, conventional double photon activation (2PP-PEEM) and 1pp-PEEM (depending on work function/ the exciting frequency) is proposed as the cause

    Perhaps UV/ light photons generate lots of photoelectrons which then form charge clusters near the nanosphere/nanocrack

    Perhaps the great energy amplification at hotspots due to surface plasmons in the nanosphere/nanocrack causes ejection of +ve metal ions to join the electron cluster to form a stabilised charge cluster (evo).That’s my idea.

    But can I let my inner plasmon/polaritron go free?

    Thanks axil

    Nice pics but little math.. I can't find an answer to the question which comes out of Srinivan's query

    I will bear in mind yr " soliton/polaritron" assertion

    but I am still trying to figure out

    What keeps a charge cluster together

    and overcomes the Coulombic repulsion?

    especially in ball lightning which fascinated both Tesla and Shoulders


    I think that a Fox reference has some reference about -and will check that out.


    http://scholar.google.com.au/s…SAhUBlZQKHW2iBsEQgQMIGTAA

    Axil said "EVO is not a cluster of electrons. The EVO is a soliton of polaritons"

    My browser didn't go for the link


    I need some math to answer the Srinivasan query.

    What keeps a charge cluster together

    and overcomes the Coulombic repulsion.


    Can't find much here from LENR stalwart Hal Fox 1997


    http://www.padrak.com/ine/FB97_1.html


    who describes how the charge clusters/ can contain protons ? and great energy density can be imparted into these clusters.


    I think one problem is wrong models eg (electrons as charged spinning point particles with mass.)

    Perhaps the electron orbitsphere model of Randell Mills with 5 kinds of calculatable energy may explain how

    ball lightning /charge clusters/EVOs, solitrons can stay together


    zhydrogen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/BLP-presentation-a.pdf

    Re: Charge clusters- EVOs


    Dr Srinivasan's Query ~8.00 time mark (redpill)003


    "You have a million electrons all packed together

    How can an electron cluster of a million..

    and become a ....

    I don’t understand electron cluster"


    Neither do I and neither did Richard Feynman


    but

    "According to a recently published book (4) Shoulders described the idea of CC to Richard Feynman. The great scientist rejected the idea at first. But then he wrote (5): “when you were in my office I could not see how 1010 or 1011 electrons could be kept as a ball in a vacuum without ions. So I was skeptical and didn’t let you tell me about them. I must apologize for it has come to my attention that it is indeed possible . . . Now that I understand how it might work, I should be glad to discuss it again anytime you wish.” Jin and Fox (1) refer to several theoretical papers devoted to CCs (6,7,8)"


    Source: Kowalski 2003 http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/48clusters.html

    It would be nice to see that letter.

    What a tangled web we weave

    Rigel

    asked quite abit

    I was replying to Picasso, who asked me to check Maths.

    I had no maths to check.. but if he wants me to check some relevant maths I can try.. provided it doesn't involve quaternions or Lagrangians

    I, like Bob , am wary of official viewpoints, Anyone aware of LENR history should be wary of official viewpoints

    I was actually unaware of dr Judy's book or all the fuss about Its not high profile in the Southern hemisphere.

    Unaware as well re: EVO's.

    Its possible that both are relevant to LENR

    and by heaven its far more interesting than talking about Rossi etc

    Picasso-150 wrote "check you math."


    No math there to check

    I just put Judy Wood's interpretation of a selected set of sequential photos.

    which Bob presumably looked at in his 'epiphany' period


    I am trying to check the validity of Bob's sources... that's all.

    thanks for you input.

    I don't think Bob is having a breakdown as Rigel suggests

    but I appreciate the concern


    Thanks for the reference about the other video

    The video you refer to , I think I found,

    is perhaps better for basing some maths on

    using a few assumptions on lengths and angles



    However reading the 76 comments attached to this video

    there appears to be no math based debunking to actually check

    IMO.

    If you have some maths to check please advise


    On an emotional level the horror of 2001 still registers with me,

    even though I was comfortably away in NZ at the time.

    God Bless America and Trump

    Barty "There is absolutely no logical sense for a government to suppress a technology"


    Most politicians and civil servants in government have poor knowledge of which technology is better


    However technological companies and inventors have a very logical reason to oppose and suppress 'better' competitors

    Eventually these suppression efforts fail .. but 'eventually" can take decades.


    Luckily Edison could not suppress Tesla's AC generator...

    but if he had enough political/financial influence Edison would have suppressed it for decades

    so that he could rake in the profits from his DC technology