Quite aside from the business consequences of his comments, my perception of Mills is that the failure of the LENR community to take his theory more seriously -- particularly given the LENR community's theoretic poverty -- is "bad science", independent of the quality of the empirical work of the LENR community.
If his theory is as coherent, all encompassing and supported by experiment as he believes it is, then his contempt for the LENR community's ignorance of it -- particularly given the dominant culture's hostility to it -- is quite understandable. On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson < orionwo...@charter.net> wrote: > Mills recently had more uncomplimentary things to say about recent LENR > research. See SCP thread: > > > > "a mixture of nickel and lithium aluminum hydride" > > > > See thread: > > > > > https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SocietyforClassicalPhysics/conversations/topics/4274 > > > > > > > ***************************************************************************** > > > > A poster, James Bowery, brought up a discussion about Alexander > Parkhomov's recent work. James posted: > > > > > Alexander Parkhomov, a Russian scientist: > > > http://www.researchgate.net/profile/A_Parkhomov > > > > > > claims he has replicated Rossi's E-Cat using "a mixture of nickel and > > > lithium aluminum hydride". > > > > > > He provides an English translation of his report: > > > > > > > http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Lugano-Confirmed.pdf > > > > > > In his replication, he measures heat output by completely boiling off a > fixed amount of > > > water rather than inferring power output via infrared camera. He > reports no radioactivity or energetic gammas. > > > > Randy's initial reply: > > > > > How does he know what is in the Ecat cell? LiAlH4 + Ni as a hydrogen > > > dissociator run at elevated temperature is disclosed in my patents. > > > They are filed in Russia. > > > > James Replied: > > > > > A few people have been speculating for some time that Rossi's E-Cat > > > nickle-based "catalytic" system was actually a takeoff of > > > Hydrocatalysis Power Corp's nickle-based "catalytic" technology. > > > > > > One might further speculate that Dr. Parkhomov took that seriously enough > > > to look into the BLP Russian patent filings involving LiAlH4 + Ni. > > > > Randy's follow-up reply: > > > > > In general, I have found the rogues left in that bogus cold fusion field > are > > > very poor at science, self deluded, or dishonest. Telling is that I was > > > flamed when I published on a catalytic reaction involving light hydrogen > > > and nickel, and now it is the main event. Of course, no one admits to my > > > work. Shameful. Good luck to them getting light hydrogen to fuse or > undergo > > > a nuclear reaction. > > > > > > None the less I think that it is a mistake to use a hydrogen porous > vessel > > > for a hydrino reaction. > > > > > ***************************************************************************** > > > > Obviously there is no love lost between Dr. Mills and the loosely > associated LENR community - at least it would seem from Dr. Mills' POV. Of > particular interest to me, Dr. Mills states (and also complains that) he > had once been "flamed" when he published work on "... a catalytic reaction > involving light hydrogen and nickel, and now it is the main [LENR] event." > Mills initially seems to be saying that he finds many LENR researchers to > be, in his opinion, " very poor at science, self deluded, or dishonest". > But then he follows up with the comment that he had been "flamed" and that > "no on admits to [his prior] work." IMO, that would seem to contradict > Mills' prior claim that he finds LENR research to be a bogus science filled > with some dishonest researchers. I tend to think Mills makes such > statements primarily for strategic BLP business reasons rather than wanting > to make an honest effort to discuss any underlying scientific content of > the latest LENR data. From Mils' POV, they are unwelcomed distractions. > > > > IOW, Move along, move along... nothing to see here. > > > > I would add, it's an understandable position any CEO might take for > strategic BLP business reasons - primarily to maintain control over their > R&D plans. But from the perspective of pursuing scientific inquiry...it > stinks. > > > > Comments? > > > > Regards, > > Steven Vincent Johnson > > svjart.orionworks.com > > zazzle.com/orionworks >
