Is there anyone who believes Mills' hydrino theory who also understands quantum 
mechanics?

Sent from my iPhone. 

On May 15, 2011, at 16:08, "Mark Iverson" <zeropo...@charter.net> wrote:

> I renamed this thread cuz I'd like to hear opinions as to WHY an engineer 
> succeeded where ALL the scientists failed in optimizing the excess heat and 
> controllability of whatever this reaction is???
>  
> In our conversation about Mills/BLP, Peter wrote:
> "His theory is OK, verified by experiment."
>  
> But an 'engineer' (i.e., someone not real knowledgeable about theoretical 
> foundations) optimized the excess heat effect and controllability of the 
> reaction in only a few years and with very little money compared to BLP (20 
> years and $60M)...
>  
> So either Mills' theory has serious errors or holes, or they have incompetent 
> scientists/engineering managers who are making  bad decisions as to what 
> tests/experiments to do, thus wasting alot of time and not achieving true 
> UNDERSTANDING of what variables affect the reaction.
>  
> If Mills' theories were accurate, then optimizing/manipulating the reaction 
> mechanisms would have happened by now... and they would have beat Rossi to 
> the market.  What's more likely is that the conclusions that come out of 
> Mills' theories have caused them to go down numerous 'dead-ends'... and 
> Mills' ego refuses to acknowledge that his theory needs some serious  
> revisions.
> -Mark
> 
> 
> From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2011 11:43 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
> 
> The reason is, in my opinion, that is very difficult to achieve
> a CONTINUOUS generation of energy- see my paper 
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/04/questions-preparing-swot-analysis-of-ni.html
>  what conditions are necessary for a new source of energy.
> 
> But I think this year (good for new energy, it seems) Randy will be on the 
> market with his CIHT technology.
> His theory is OK, verified by experiment. Technology is more difficult than 
> scientific experiments.
> Peter
> 
> 
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Mark Iverson <zeropo...@charter.net> wrote:
> I would wager that the reason Mills hasn't got a commercial device, after 20 
> years and $60M, is because his theory is flawed...
> -Mark
> 
> 
> From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2011 9:46 PM
> 
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
> 
> Perhaps the best person to discuss your hydrino ideas is Randy Mills himself. 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Peter Gluck
> Cluj, Romania
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
> 

Reply via email to