Sometimes it is best to shave with Occam's razor.

Bill Gates says he will invest $1B in any real new source of energy. Why hasn't 
Mills addressed this source.


Mills will not allow any discussion of this opportunity, because he would have 
to submit to due diligence.


But the mindless followers will argue about IP strategies to avoid this 
technological collision.


The people who want to give Mills, Rossi and Godes a free pass have succumbed 
to the infinite upside potential in contrast to modest investment.   They 
cannot fathom the magnitude of a successful experiment, so the risk/rewards 
calculations are obtained by division by zero.


________________________________
From: Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com>
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 5:38 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Should Mills and Rossi be lumped together?


It has never been independently observed, but is often quoted.


If it was true, he could openly demonstrate it operating.


________________________________
From: a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 8:19 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Should Mills and Rossi be lumped together?

Supposedly the plasma is  >3500C.  As it runs without any input power why do 
you not think it generates any (excess) heat?

AA

On 3/26/2017 7:35 PM, Brian Ahern wrote:

They needn't be lying. Measuring energy flow with a plasma is challenging.


________________________________
From: a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net><mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 1:19 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Should Mills and Rossi be lumped together?

Brian,
Apart from some calorimetry on the SunCell in the early days, would you not 
think a self perpetuating plasma would produce some heat?  Several (hired) 
independent investigators also back Mill's claims, or do you think they are all 
lying?

AA


On 3/26/2017 12:00 PM, Brian Ahern wrote:

A.    ..". there is good evidence that the SunCell produces a large amount of 
excess heat..."


Amazingly, even RM offers no data or measurements on this issue. He could show 
water flow calorimetry to an accuracy of 50% within two days of set up and 
calibration. I would offer to pay for it and conduct it for him.

Alas, there is no calorimetry offered to the suggestible investors.

The mantra for Mills, Rossi and Godes is:  No data =   no failure =  ambiguity 
coupled with  enticing potential profits = large investments while showing 
nothing.

If they conducted tests and failed the investment stream would cease.

________________________________
From: a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net><mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 11:23 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Should Mills and Rossi be lumped together?

Eric,
I don't feel expert enough to pass judgement.  I think that is the point.  
Physicists more expert than me can't make up their minds whether Mills is a 
genius or delusional.  That he can come up with values for particles that are 
more accurate than from QM and that his program can show the position nuclei 
and electrons for complicated molecules (proven) suggests to me that it is 
premature to be so dogmatic that he is wrong.  Likewise there is good evidence 
that the SunCell produces a large amount of excess heat, though one might 
quibble about the actual value.

AA

On 3/25/2017 5:52 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 4:49 PM, a.ashfield 
<a.ashfi...@verizon.net<mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>> wrote:

To me it looks like the hand waving is largely from the skeptics.  I have yet 
to see a specific item that is wrong in Mills theories highlighted by them.

Did you take a look at the link I sent?  Can you help us to make sense of those 
equations?  What would be ideal would be an explicit derivation of the 
electron-neutron mass ratio, which is purportedly based on those equations.  If 
you can do this, it would be a very helpful thing.  My strong hunch:  it is not 
possible, because the Mills neutron-electron mass ratio is ad hoc and was not 
derived from them.  But your knowledge here can help to dispel this impression.

Eric




Reply via email to