Previous in Forum: World's Smallest Car! Tricked Out with Buckyballs!   Next in Forum: Mini Cooper Autonomous Biped Robot
Close
Close
Close
4 comments
Rate Comments: Nested
Power-User
United States - Member - New Member Fans of Old Computers - PDP 11 - New Member Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 381
Good Answers: 8

Something New? or Yet Another Perpetual Motion Machine

11/06/2005 10:26 PM

The Guardian is reporting on claims of a new energy source by Dr. Randell Mills, a Harvard University medic who also studied electrical engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. Millis claims to have built a prototype power source that generates up to 1,000 times more heat than conventional fuel. His "magic" - He claims to have formulated a new form of Hydrogen in which the electron is in a tighter orbit about the nucleus. Unfortunately, this goes against the principles of quantum theory, which states that electrons must lie in discrete, well defined orbits. Dr. Millis' response: quantum theory must be wrong.

Dr. Millis claims to have verification of his results by independent experts. He's claiming that the first products by his company Blacklight Power , will be on the market within four years. (they're hiring electrical and mechanical engineers, by the way)

I'm always leery of claims that fly in the face of well established theory that has a years of scientific evidence backing it up. It's also an amazing coincidence that this new discovery just happened along at a time when there's a lot of attention focused on alternative energy to replace the burning of fossil fuels.

I guess time will tell.

Register to Reply
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Power-User
United Kingdom - Member - New Member Hobbies - Model Rocketry - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In my house, at the loom.
Posts: 197
Good Answers: 3
#1

Independent Verification?

11/07/2005 2:44 PM

I must admit, I'm not up on Quantum Mechanics, but aren't there knowledge holes in the theory that could possibly be exploited?

__________________
The yoke a man creates for himself by wrong-doing will breed hate in the kindliest nature . . .
Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#2
In reply to #1

Re:Independent Verification?

11/07/2005 11:20 PM

Since all Physical laws are based on the observation of nature, they can't violate those observations (like the conservation of energy on a macroscopic scale or the transmission of data faster than light), or else the laws would have been incorrectly formulated in the first place, and need to be revised.

However there is a remarkable amount that IS allowed even under the physical laws we have today.

My favorite example is syncotron Radiation.

In Particle accelerators a high-energy beam of protons is accelerated through a seiries of toroidal magnets arranged in a ring. when the beam passes through one of these magnets it changes its direction (and thus its momentum). Since the magnets are anchored and cannot move, conservation of momentum causes a high energy x-ray to be emmited with a vector momentum such that it cancels out with the momentum change of the electron.

What is this eh? A light beam is randomly emmited? Well there's nothing that says it can't happen, but it sure is weird. and the beam is not emmited if the magnets are allowed to move. hmm. And the energy for the light beam is removed from the current flowing through the magnet.

And there always is the possibility that these measurements (such as the conservation of energy) are just part of a larger picture that we havent yet discovered.

Just because we havent seen it doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

Take a universe consisting of two protons constantly held in electrostatic repulsion a constant distance away from each other. Than a person observing this universe would have no way of knowing that the strong nuclear force existed.

However I am of the optomistic opinion that not all things have yet been observed yet and there is still more out there.

But using the current cards of physics we have today there is no infinite mana combo (M. the Gathering terminology)!

However I really cannot awnser your question in detail because I am just learning Q.Mechanics myself and dont know enuogh about it yet.

Ah well,

SB

Register to Reply
The Engineer
Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Physics... United States - Member - NY Popular Science - Genetics - Organic Chemistry... Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Ingeniería en Español - Nuevo Miembro - New Member

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Albany, New York
Posts: 5060
Good Answers: 129
#3

It's possible, but it wouldn't be called Hydrogen

11/10/2005 5:19 PM

You can't make Hydrogen with an electron and have a closer orbital than the calculated ground state. However, if you were to replace the electron in Hydrogen with a particle that has the same charge but larger mass, than yes, you'd get higher energy orbitals, but this wouldn't be Hydrogen anymore.

I remember Blacklight from when I was last job hunting several years ago. Back then they were saying they'd be releasing products in the next couple of years. I think it's a scam, but who knows, I've been wrong plenty.

Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Paris
Posts: 144
#4

Well , you should never say never....

11/16/2005 1:23 PM

What I have understood is that Dr. Millis' project is based on a concept dating back to 1936 and that since then has not been explained, nor been referred to by peers of Lord Rayleigh who discovered it. A lot of developments in this field are recent and scientists are closing in on the link between electromagnetism and gravity as it seems in many an article I can find on this subject.

Mentioning that something cannot be explained by "conventional" science does not necessarily mean it will never be explained since science is getting deeper and deeper into the "matter".

Important to me seems that there are results from independent institutes: which ones, which documents? If these can be presented I keep my mind open for progress and inventions. In any case the absence of explanation has never been a garantee that something is impossible. Empirical research can help a lot to get forward. I just hope for him and for all of us it is going to work out since we need to get rid of our CO2 production...

Please read the information behind the following link for your background knowledge:
http://www.ovni.ch/~kouros/emhdbo.htm

__________________
Kind Regards, Randolph Toom - www.heat2power.net
Register to Reply
Register to Reply 4 comments
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Poster (1); Bayes (1); Randolph Toom (1); Silas Marner (1)

Previous in Forum: World's Smallest Car! Tricked Out with Buckyballs!   Next in Forum: Mini Cooper Autonomous Biped Robot

Advertisement