Posted on 11/09/2021 12:41:59 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Maybe there is a failsafe moron after all these years.
They can use them to power lights and fans on the German border so Germany’s solar and wind power can run 24 hours per day.
France used to be leaders in the field. Back when Jacque Cousteau specials were always looked forward to. Family viewing around the tube, popcorn even.
Back when Pluto was still a planet... ah the goodle days...
France used to be leaders in the field. Back when Jacque Cousteau specials were always looked forward to. Family viewing around the tube, popcorn even.
Back when Pluto was still a planet... ah the goodle days...
Need a small reactor to replace my emergency generator.
The French are smart and will have ample, reliable electricity without cluttering the landscape with unreliable and expensive windmills and solar farms.
The future of nuclear power [all power generation] is LENR.
https://freerepublic.com/tag/lenr/index?tab=articles
France has no coal and, remarkably, they’re the only euroweenies who’ve figured out that “renewables” won’t haul the freight. They even have the only non-US nuclear flattop in existence.
Never.
BrLP is rolling out 250 kW boilers this year for field trials ... LENR is still a ‘bench’ oddity at only a few Watts only ...
The LENR boys have the wrong physics, the wrong ‘models’ and have never moved beyond making a few Watts from trapping Hydrogen in Palladium in an overnight or two ‘soak’ ...
Best of luck to Mills. I’ve almost always considered his stuff to be LENR but he says it aint, so I’ll give him that consideration. If he’s the first one to break through that barrier of cheap energy production, then I hope he becomes a trillionaire. Same with Rossi [who ALSO is claiming that his stuff aint LENR].
Quick backgrounder re: Mills history on or about LENR:
From: https://www.infinite-energy.com/resources/iccf10.html
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D.
Paper presented at ICCF10, August 2003
In the spring of 1991, Dr. Randell Mills et al. reported significant excess heat from ordinary water cells with nickel electrodes, an energy which they deemed to be coming not from nuclear reactions, but from a new form of catalyzed shrinkage reaction via a drastically remodeled form of the hydrogen atom and a re-write of quantum mechanics, which is now called by Mills “Classical Quantum Mechanics” (CQM) [Now called “GUTCP” for Grand Unified Theory of Classical Physics].
...
CF/LENR scientists, themselves outcasts from the Establishment, strangely enough have not paid much attention to Mills’ experimental work. This is most unfortunate, because it is compendious and strongly supportive of excess heat but also of non-standard, highly anomalous, spectral anomalies from hydrogen systems.
This stance can be explained because of the very strong resistance by CF/LENR theorists to exploring foundational flaws in Standard Quantum Mechanics (SQM). Mills’ CQM [GUTCP] work could shed considerable light on the problem of CF/LENR- these are results that cannot and should not be logically separated from efforts to understand CF/LENR results proper.
...
But Mills, while accepting that his “shrunken” (sub-ground state) hydrogen atoms (”hydrinos”) may well cause nuclear reactions due to their more charge-neutral presentation to other nuclei, does not believe that the excess heat being reported in CF/LENR experiments is of nuclear origin- i.e. the direct result of nuclear reactions
...
Mills’ CQM [GUTCP] theory ... does have two characteristics that recommend it:
A. It seems to have very significant predictive power to suggest what hydrogen systems are likely to evolve excess heat, and which ones may not (more such predictive ability than most CF/LENR concepts), and
B. CQM is not beholden to the “mainstream cold fusion hypothesis” (MCFH)- i.e. at least it allows the possibility that many instances of excess heat are not of nuclear origin per se.
...
Mills et al. at BlackLight Power Corp. in Cranbury, New Jersey have mounted what is one of the most direct threats ever to the entire foundation of Quantum Mechanics, because the compendious experimental data sets- if valid- prima facie cannot be explained by Standard Quantum Mechanics (SQM). There is convincing excess energy data of large magnitude and there are spectral emission lines that do not correspond to previously recognized atomic structure.
Let’s say you have 99% confidence that MIlls will break through with his invention. What would you say is the thing to invest in right now that would benefit the most from his energy breakout? I’m talking for ordinary investors who can pick up the phone and put a few thousand dollars onto sumthin, not independently wealthy millionaires on the ground floor.
Conversely, what would be sumthin a person could invest in that would benefit if Mills does NOT break through?
I did this exercise for LENR in 2013 and chose CYPW but I should have chosen Capstone Turbine. It would have been like investing in Levi’s in 1847. If gold is discovered in California, your investment really takes off. But if people just see a good product at a good price, it has modest, ordinary gains.
re: “Let’s say you have 99% confidence that MIlls will break through with his invention.”
Not even going to go there; it’s an engineering exercise now.
The REAL risk is that someone else will beat him to market using the ‘effect’ (taking the electron in Hydrogen to a lower energy level) he is credited with discovering, or more specifically to __market dominance__, which is what matters, which is why he has been so careful to file patents, which also slows things down ...
If you’re “not even gonna go there”... then... don’t go there.
I didn’t agree to your 99% stipulation (or really any number) now did I?
I’m not gonna go there.
Stipulation? You should narrow down which end of the continuum of the definition you’re using.
stip·u·la·tion
/ˌstipyəˈlāSH(ə)n/
Learn to pronounce
noun
a condition or requirement that is specified or demanded as part of an agreement.
“they donated their collection of prints with the stipulation that they never be publicly exhibited”
In my case it isn’t “demanded”. Nor is it part of an agreement. It is simply an element of a hypothetical, and you simply did not address the hypothetical.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3992415/posts?page=311#311
“I’ve noticed that liberals never address a hypothetical. Even when they THINK they do, they don’t.”
WHEN you write (wrote?) “Let’s say you have 99% confidence that ...”, that’s proposing a stipulation, a stipulation I would not, and did not, accept nor even really acknowledge.
I took the discussion in another direction, kinda like I’m doing here.
IF you want to use your time productively, study up on the 22 some different analytical methods that were used to evaluate the process and Hydrino product that Mills’ technique creates. You should start with these:
o Electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopy: electron spin flip with spin-orbital coupling and fluxon coupling energies. [Princeton University, Delft University of Technology, Bruker Scientific LLC, Billerica, MA]
o Raman spectroscopy: molecular hydrino rotational transitions with spin-orbital coupling and fluxon coupling energies, and rotational-vibrational transitions. Deuterium shifted rotational transitions with spin-orbital coupling and fluxon coupling energies. Raman peaks matching those of the Diffuse Interstellar Bands (DIBs).
o High resolution visible spectroscopy of H-(1/2) binding and fluxon coupling energies.
o Infrared spectroscopy: application of a magnetic field permits molecular rotational infrared excitation by coupling to the aligned magnetic dipole of H2(1/4).
o Electron beam emission spectroscopy: rotational-vibrational energies of molecular hydrino with spin-orbital coupling and fluxon coupling energies.
o Gas chromatography: faster migration than any known gas, higher thermal conductivity than that of any known gas.
More info here: https://brilliantlightpower.com/pdf/Analytical_Presentation.pdf
So... you didn’t narrow the definition, you even say outright you didn’t even acknowledge it. It’s like talking to humpty dumpty. Might as well be talking to the wall he fell off of.
You’re actually ‘science illiterate’, aren’t you? Rather, are you a lawyer or paralegal?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.