1- as far I know Ni is not a reactant in the Catalyst Induced hydrino Transition Process. In judging Mills reaction to the E-cat we have to consider how busy is he now- and that in this stage he has to solve many engineering not scientific problems. The proof is in the...CIHT, it works this year OK, delay -= problems. Peter
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:47 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson < svj.orionwo...@gmail.com> wrote: > From Peter: > > ... > > > I think it is outrigth logical fallacy to compare > > Mills' hyperchemistry to Rossi's nuclear jiu-jitsu. > > Why not? The fact that both processes appear to use nickel powder, > hydrogen, a mystery catalyst, and heat certainly suggests there may > very well exist linkage. > > > Mills has told me that his process has nothing to do > > with Rossi's and he is not interested in what Ross > > has done. > > I hope Mills' said that mostly for tactical reasons, perhaps as a > matter for public consumption. (...and perhaps to appease his > financial backers.) If that truly is his opinion then Mills reveals as > much curiosity & inquisitiveness towards the work of potential > competitors as ITER physicists and scientist have shown towards his > own work. The statement strikes me as being narrow-minded, incredibly > arrogant, and hypocritical. > > Let me put it this way: I'd sure be looking at Rossi's work, and > taking as many notes as I can. > > > > If somebody knows more about Mills's theory and results > > than Mills himself- the best is to discuss wit the authors > > (that's the function of literary critics too to explain to > > everybody, including the author what has he wanted to say > > in his opus) > > Agreed. Mills certainly has every right to defend the merits of his > theories, just as his critics have every right to questions it. > > Regards > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.zazzle.com/orionworks > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
