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 >
