Go Back   Physics Help Forum > College/University Physics Help > Theoretical Physics

Theoretical Physics Theoretical Physics Help Forum

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Oct 29th 2016, 02:52 PM   #11
Forum Admin
topsquark's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,554
Originally Posted by harakiri406 View Post
I'm afraid that you're not going to like my response either, but here goes.

I'm not a scientist, just an IT guy from Belgium with an interest in breakthrough developments because I'm concerned about my kids' future. It is my belief that science is the only answer to save mankind from disaster. My knowledge of physics is only a slight bit higher than what Average Joe knows about it, so I'm nowhere near capable of arguing at your level.
So instead of a scientific approach to counter your arguments, I'm going to have to go for a logical one.
Logic tells me doctor Mills has been a reputable scientist with serious degrees even outside the physics discipline (he has several medical degrees as well). In contrast to people like for instance Andrea Rossi, he has never been officially exposed as a fraud and has always been very open about their developments, exposing almost every detail of the design apart from the right mixtures.
But especially, logical me also witnesses the recent developments at BrLP following the successful demonstrations that the technology is real, works and is very near to commercialization. The latest demo from October 26 has proven that the last boundary of melting tungsten ignition electrodes has been overcome, simply by replacing them with liquid silver which is already in there as part of the catalyst. The device is now capable of continuous operation, limited for now to running during office hours.
Maybe the GUTCP is flawed, I'm for sure am not able to tell. Mills has been rewriting the book for the last 25 years. Yet I say maybe it's time for the rest of the scientific world to open their minds and try to contribute to Mills' theories because reality is catching up on them.
Now, this is emotional me talking: I've been following BrLP (formerly Blacklight Power) for the last 10 years now, ever since I found out about them, ever since my wife was pregnant of my first son. Over the years there were periods where you would get updates from them that made me hopeful. Than it would again become quiet. But I would never forget about them. My only worry was that something would happen to Mills and all of his work would end up in the trash.
But now we're 2016 and look what's ahead of us. This technology could end global warming. With such an abundance of power and other technologies we could even revert it. Drones could be sent out into the oceans for iron fertilization to stimulate phytoplankton bloom. There are new technologies that can convert co2 back into fuel if you put enough power into it. The Ocean Cleanup Project could clean our oceans of plastic. We have enough plastic waste that we can sift and recycle forever. Google's Radarcat technology can be used to separate complete landfills and bring it back to raw materials.
Also imagine what political shift BrLP would cause: wars over oil and gas: gone. Demand for this would become marginal and that market will cave in.
Of course it's not going to go as smooth as that, but in whole, (and you may call me a dreamer) I say the future looks bright. My only regret is that I've not been able to contribute to all of this. The only thing I can do is try and create awareness as it seems people here hadn't even heard about it yet.
I have no troubles about you disseminating the information. That's how people learn and how Science functions. I am disappointed in not getting my questions answered...I am curious to know what the theory says. Unfortunately though, in a situation like this the devil is in the details. Without a person to steer me through this I'd have to study it quite a bit (three textbooks worth) and I'm not willing to put that kind of time in for this, a theory I've never heard of that apparently has so many flaws on the basic level.

Feel free to continue the conversation with others, though.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

See the forum rules here.
topsquark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20th 2017, 06:08 AM   #12
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Serbia
Posts: 11
I've read his book it's mostly gibberish. Classical field theories cannot accurately explain the quantum domain, they failed at every attempt. Even Special Relativity had to be adapted, regarding time, to suit QED and QCD.
NikPerk is offline   Reply With Quote

  Physics Help Forum > College/University Physics Help > Theoretical Physics

bomb, dropping

Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Physics Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
surface tension and dropping (NEED HELP İN PROBLEM) koytos Thermodynamics and Fluid Mechanics 6 Feb 26th 2016 03:35 AM
Bird dropping fish question HexyRexySmexy Energy and Work 5 Sep 14th 2014 05:30 AM
Helicopter dropping a package mbruin Kinematics and Dynamics 2 Jun 26th 2014 09:34 PM
Lifting/dropping something at constant velocity FistLength Energy and Work 28 Jan 28th 2014 06:44 PM
[SOLVED] Dropping problem xtheunknown0 Kinematics and Dynamics 2 Sep 16th 2010 12:38 AM

Facebook Twitter Google+ RSS Feed