Excess Heat

Marc Andreessen is one of the earliest tech entrepreneurs of the information age, a Democrat and major league venture capitalist.  His many successes give reason to take his thoughts very seriously.  He has been quite skilled at recognizing value in the complex and competitive emerging fields.  Did all that recently change?  Probably not. This recent ZeroHedge article about a Joe Rogan interview of Andreessen is focused on the statements from Andreessen about meetings in Spring of 2024 with Biden officials.  Andreessen is influential for obvious reasons, besides being a fountain of capital to fuel the aspirations of tech innovators.  Influential people are those with whom politicians want to somehow join forces.  In this case, it backfired because of the policy that shocked Andreessen concerning startup businesses, which have been his 'bread and butter'. How does this differ from a merchant being approached by a mob made man who makes him 'an offer ...

The last two papers available from Brilliant Light Power's Randell Mills are about Electron Paramagnetic Resonance spectroscopy (EPR) and Gas Chromatography (GC) studies performed on samples of gas from the Hydrino reactor. These are in addition to many other analyses performed relating to Hydrino.  The staggering number of types of analyses that confirm the Hydrino Hypothesis (HH) strongly contrasts with the lack of acceptance in the scientific community of the claims made by Dr. Mills.  Why is he rejected? One major reason for rejection is that his ideas are built around the existence of the Hydrino, which is not generally accepted as real.  Naturally, skeptics request samples of Hydrino in order to perform their own analysis, and Dr. Mills was unable to provide them.  The reason for this is that storing Hydrino is not simple.  It is so small that it leaks through any usual container quickly, so if a quantity of it in a bottle is shipped, it will be gone by...

 This is a test link .

The research work of Dr. Robert Bush, Dr. Robert Eagleton and student James Djunaedy was the subject of an article published in Dr. Eugene Mallove's magazine, Infinite Energy , number 12, 1997 .  I was working for FAA when I received this issue and it strongly influenced me to attempt a Mills replication.  The article describes a situation that is not supposed to happen.  It was one thing to believe that Fleischmann and Pons blew it and claimed experimental results of excess heat that could not be reproduced.  I do not believe that to be the case, but it is believable to most people.  In this instance, at Cal Poly, was a team producing results in a robust and highly reproducible fashion, if their reports are to be accepted.  Why would someone not find their reports credible, or at least worthy of consideration? This group reported strong calorimetry results using light water electrolytic cells, run at sufficient input power to exclude the possible confound...

Everyone is wrong sometimes, so what precisely is the title asking?  Is Mills wrong about his theory, the Grand Unified Theory of Classical Mechanics (GUTCP)?  Or, is the theory generally correct, but wrong in some aspect?  Or, is the theory totally wrong, yet the data predicted by the theory proved to be correct by empirical testing?  Or, is the theory essentially wrong and the empirical data that is said to be supporting it falsified or mistaken?   I began to approach Mills by reading his 1991 paper as far as I could.  It was 1997.  I got the gist of it.  He was saying that the atomic physics that followed from the Schrodinger Equation (SQM) was not correct, particularly that the ground state predicted by only positive integer values of n in the Rydberg equation did not give the full picture.  In this theory, Mills states that the ground state postulated in SQM is incorrect, that there are energy states of the atom below the "ground s...

Benjamin Franklin in 1786 observed that lead had been used for far too long considering its known toxicity.  "You will observe with concern how long a useful truth may be known and exist before it is generally received and practiced on."   The YouTube channel of Derek Muller presents enjoyable and stimulating thoughts about science and the way that human society develops and appreciates, or abuses, scientific knowledge.  I would invite him to investigate Randell Mills, but it seems likely that he would not wish to delve so far into such a deep rabbit hole.  There is enough non-controversial fact available that is very amazing, so that he does not need to risk a hard won reputation for intelligent content.  Still, it is possible to approach the subject of hydrino evidence in an objective fashion, but for far too many people, any hint of touching upon a subject that is tainted with snake oil stigma is automatic fodder for ridicule.  Most people do not have th...