It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by mnemeth1
How does producing energy useing a chemical reaction prove Einstein wrong???
BTW, that's assuming it works, which is not proven...
According to SR, the reaction they are using to generate the power is impossible.
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by mnemeth1
Well, know who I'd call an idiot in this thread,
and it aint Einstein...
Originally posted by ArMaP
The topic of this thread is "Free Energy Produced - Einstein Proven Wrong Again", so discussion should be focused on that.
They didn't confirm anything, except they don't know what's going on. Listen to about 5 minutes in the video you posted in the OP. The Rowan University professor states:
Originally posted by mnemeth1
OK lets see.
Rowan University confirmed it
Have you got a link to Harvard's website confirming this?
Harvard CfA run spectrographs confirmed it
I'll give them a contract too, if they come up with something that works, I'll buy it. If they agree to those terms there's a contract, but it doesn't mean much.
They have multiple licensing contracts with private power companies
I agree not to get your hopes up but the 2008 is understating it if we are talking about the claims of Randell Mills. Here's a five year old article from 2005:
Originally posted by hawkiye
I wouldn't get your hope up just yet these guys have been making claims since 2008.
* The Guardian, Friday 4 November 2005
It seems too good to be true: a new source of near-limitless power that costs virtually nothing, uses tiny amounts of water as its fuel and produces next to no waste. If that does not sound radical enough, how about this: the principle behind the source turns modern physics on its head.
Nov4-05, 06:15 PM
What is important about that 25 years is that this hoax has been debunked many, many times - including with public humiliation - in those 25 years. It is surprising, the gullibility of a "science correspondent", that allows this guy to lay-low for a few years until people forget that he's a crackpot, then resurface with exactly the same claim that he had before.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by badw0lf
Meh, free energy is possible right now, all you need is an extension cable and a silly neighbour and you've got yourself free energy.
And if you're a good enough neighbour yourself, you can convince her to get the internet using wireless, which effectively gets you free internet too.
Nothing is free.
No matter how must you spend on convincing people it is.
Yeah, I use the term in a lose sense here.
It isn't really "free", its just really really cheap.
The energy released in the reactions is 'free' energy in the sense that it gives back far more than you need to put into it. The closed systems they are talking about building could be classified as perpetual motion machines.
More energy comes out than you put in.
edit on 8-12-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by mnemeth1
According to SR, the reaction they are using to generate the power is impossible.
OK, so what, I expect cheap/free energy tomorrow?
How long to PROVE the theory?
How long to get it out to all?
Will they release the details so all can do it free??
It is proven.
They are producing power with it right now.
Looks like they are figuring out how they are going to bring it to market at the moment.
I'm sure they will patent the technology so you'll be able to see everything by visiting the patent office. It sounds like they are going to try and make small generators with it. The original intent was to make large scale power plants using steam turbines, but it appears they have decided against this.
edit on 8-12-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by badw0lf
Meh, free energy is possible right now, all you need is an extension cable and a silly neighbour and you've got yourself free energy.
And if you're a good enough neighbour yourself, you can convince her to get the internet using wireless, which effectively gets you free internet too.
Nothing is free.
No matter how much you spend on convincing people it is.
edit on 8/12/2010 by badw0lf because: I cant afford a spelling checker, are there any free ones that WROK?
Originally posted by GirlGenius
My hubby and a friend are working on a windmill system with a NiFe battery storage system. The research and setup is expensive but the dividend is the freedom that comes with being able to harness our own energy. It is not "free" as it relies on wind - I doubt there is truly free energy. When our systems are up and tested, we will help our neighbors who are interested in getting off the grid.
edit on 8-12-2010 by GirlGenius because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by xxshadowfaxx
reply to post by mnemeth1
You know, It doesn't matter if Einstien was right or wrong. He was a brilliant man.
How about showing him a little bit of respect?
He's a retard that thought space could bend and led us down the wrong path of science for nearly a century.
He's the worst human being to ever walk the face of the earth.
"Something real is generating energy there," said Dan Mears, president of Technology Insights, an energy technology consulting group in San Diego that investigated BlackLight for a year in 1996 on behalf of Oregon electric utility PacifiCorp.
"We were convinced there was excess energy being produced by what he was then calling 'hydrocatalysis,'" Mears said. So convinced that the team leader left to work for BlackLight for a year before moving on to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, he added.
PacifiCorp signed on, and was followed by the Mid-Atlantic utility Conectiv.
Now Morgan Stanley Dean Witter wants to usher BlackLight to an initial public offering.
Still, Mills has his supporters along with detractors. John Farrell, a chemist who was department chair at Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania when Mills was a student, said he finds Mills' deterministic model of the atom more useful than the probabilistic paradigm of current quantum theory.
Farrell became convinced of its rectitude when soft X-rays and extreme-ultraviolet, or "black-light," emissions Mills' theory predicted for transitions to lower hydrino states "perfectly matched" five spectral lines detected in the dark areas between stars, known as interstellar media. That data was gathered by University of California at Berkeley astrophysicists Simon Labov and Stuart Boyer a decade ago from a probe carried by a "sounding rocket" to the edge of the atmosphere.
"The probability of that happening was just enormously small unless Randy was right," Farrell said. The transitions also correspond to unexplained spectral lines produced by the sun's corona, he said.
Similar spectral lines from BlackLight cells were confirmed by Johannes Conrads, the recently retired director of the Institute for Low Temperature Plasma Physics, a national laboratory in Germany. Additionally, hydrogen plasmas created by the BlackLight process require "astonishingly" little energy to initiate and decay far more slowly than they normally should when input power is cut, Conrads said.
Conrads said he hasn't embraced the hydrino theory, but "the more you have from this pattern, the higher the probability you've found something. It's not trivial and I have not seen things like this before."
'South of the South Pole'
Hydrogen, with one electron and one proton, is the simplest atom and the most studied. Quantum theory describes the electron orbit of hydrogen in isolation as being in the "ground," or most stable, state with a binding energy with the proton of 13.6 electron volts and a potential energy of 27.2 EV.
That orbit can't be lowered, only inflated to unstable higher radii when energy is added. Trying to take hydrogen's electron below the ground state is like "trying to go south of the South Pole," Park quipped.
Steven Weinberg, a 1979 Nobel laureate in physics at the University of Texas at Austin, seconded Park's certainty.
The idea of the ground state "is a fabulously well-tested mathematical theorem. I would bet my life on it."
The electron's position should be seen as a "cloud" of probabilities extending from the nucleus itself out indefinitely that collapses into it's most probable orbit when observed, Weinberg said. While "of course a theory can be wrong," and "we don't turn a blind eye to anomalies...you don't throw away 75 years because of an anomaly you don't understand. As far as we know, quantum theory is rigorously valid. I have no idea what would replace it."
The Mills model treats the electron as a definable object that can be manipulated. The electron, in his conception, travels as a two-dimensional disk of charge and wraps around a nucleus like a fluctuating soap bubble. He calls the bubble an "orbitsphere."
On December 01, 2010 6:08 AM MST, New Energy Congress member, Leslie R. Pastor wrote:
Thank you Sterling! And Happy Birthday!
Your reporting on Blacklight Power (Dr. Randell Lee Mills' Company in New Jersey) is an item that I am uniquely familiar with. It was brought to my attention by Antony C. Sutton D.Sc. in 1999 by way of his FTIR publication. His Future Technology Intelligence Report was cutting edge reporting, and it irritated the "control" paradigm immensely. Dr. Sutton died in 2002.
Antony C. Sutton D.Sc., was particularly alarmed when he realized that very highly placed pressure was applied to suppress any attempt by Dr. Mills to successfully launch his 'novelty of fact' as a fully completed 'novelty of theory' application. That was over ten (10) years ago. That pressure, successfully removed Dr. Mills' original US Patent. Expunged! It was removed as error. Never mind that the claims were successful, honest and forthright. Dr. Mills was obliterated, in his ideas, and in his attempt to bring alternative fuel systems to the United States.
The people that suppressed Dr. Mills, were the same individuals who suppressed Thomas Valone, when he attempted to host a COFE at Commerce and then at State (Department of). This skullduggery is significant, and rampant throughout the Government. If you will recall, that Cold Fusion received similar treatment, and LENR took a backseat for over twenty (20) years, while the people of the United States have been subjected to Climate Gate, Global Baloney, and the unmitigated gall of the "Carbon Credit" crowd.
Dr. Peter Zimmerman deliberately buttonholed the former Secretary of State, Madeline Albright stopping the advancement of public presentation at State by Thomas Valone. Dr. Peter Zimmerman received his marching orders from Dr. Robert Park as documented by Antony C. Sutton.
Never mind that LENR is real science and real technology, it was deliberately destroyed by our own US Government.
Dr. Randell Lee Mills fortunately was protected by the high level members of his Board of Directors, (one of which was the recently deceased Rear Adm. Kelleres). Fortunately, Dr. Mills has independent means, methods of securing the appropriate advance of his technology.
By now it should be realized that the so-called "Peer Review System" is a sham, a deliberate obfuscation of the truth, and that it is and should remain a significant obsolescence of the past. As you know, Eric Krieg participated in that obscenity known as the Hydrino Study Group, of which Peter Zimmerman was a major participant. Eric Krieg acted as ombudsman. Dr. Mills valiantly defended his theory, his evidence and his US Patent; All to no avail, the powers that be were determined to suppress him, his technology, and his application of that technology. By the grace of God, he has succeeded. According to Antony C. Sutton what Dr. Peter Zimmerman and Dr. Robert Park participated in was TREASON, against the United States, its people, and its US Constitution.
That is why I do not entertain 'naysayers' and 'obfuscators' whose only intent is to malign, denigrate and to hinder advancement of significant technologies that would free the people of the United States from such tyranny, and they are still at it, even now. The "Control" Paradigm is REAL, as is the conspiracy to destroy all 'novelty of fact' and 'novelty of theory' systems.
Documentation/Reference:
www.zpenergy.com...
www.zpenergy.com...
peswiki.com...irectory:Blacklight_Power
pesn.com...
www.svpvril.com...
Dr. Peter D. Zimmerman
en.wikipedia.org...
cstsp.aaas.org...
www.fas.org...
www.ppionline.org...
Dr. Robert L. Park
en.wikipedia.org...
bobpark.physics.umd.edu...
www.suppressedscience.net...
The Control Paradigm