Brilliant Light Power Demonstration, June 28th 2016

Four months? AnarchoCapitalist, aka mnemeth1 and perhaps a few other usernames too, has been championing fundamental violations of well-established physical laws since I became a member of this site in 2005 — or at best, shortly thereafter.

You have to hand it to him. His faith is strong.

a reply to: Astyanax

You have to hand it to him. His faith is strong.

Faith or desperation? Me thinks he might have invested more than he should have into this scam?

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: Phage

Mills made additional discoveries that caused him to abandon that plan. You can see in that article he's projecting 2 cents per kilowatt-hour based on that old technology. With this unit he's projecting around .01 cents per kilowatt hour or less. This new unit is also built to be mobile, for use in vehicles, while the old system was not.

He should be on track to making his first billion by now if that is true....then his first 10 billion, then his first 100 billion etc...

But he won't..will he anarcho-capitalist?

originally posted by: Astyanax
Four months? AnarchoCapitalist, aka mnemeth1 and perhaps a few other usernames too, has been championing fundamental violations of well-established physical laws since I became a member of this site in 2005 — or at best, shortly thereafter.

You have to hand it to him. His faith is strong.

Don't forget he also once called Einstein one of the worst people to have ever lived.

a reply to: smurfy

That would be incorrect. Everything is not energy.

Consider the Schumann resonance. It's the product of something being conductive and having a certain shape and size. It's much like the emptiness in a cup.

There's no energy involved in that condition existing. And it's not some magical thing that energy flows from, despite thousands of woo sites mooing about it being some font of existence, or more amusing, something you can hear.

a reply to: Astyanax

I smell your fear.

The fear that I've been right this whole time.

a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

Well it looks like he invented thermite (oh wait we've done this already never mind) it's a chemical reaction you can do this in any lab. There's no magic you can tell he has to get it up to tempratures to start the reaction. Sounds like they are using gas and probably hydrogen but it doesn't have to be.

A mixture of iron oxide Fe2O3 and aluminum powder. When it is ignited the aluminum powder reacts with the O3 in the Fe203 in a highly exothermic reaction, the resulting product is molten iron. Yes you get a tremendous amount if heat but by no means are you producing more energy than you start with. It's like arguing that a nuclear reactor produces more energy than it starts with. As far as converting this to electricity you would be lucky to capture half the energy because the reaction is very quick unless you kept feeding it which would get very expensive especially the silver.

Bottom line they put on a show that people go oh wow not realizing it's a chemical reaction.

PS don't think you want to have a run away chemical reaction in a vehicle you might as well stick a lit rag in your gas tank.

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: Astyanax

I smell your fear.

The fear that I've been right this whole time.

^this guy!

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: Astyanax

I smell your fear.

The fear that I've been right this whole time.

Yes mate. We are ALL so arrogant and tied to our beliefs that even the promise of almost free energy isn't enough to sway us. No more electricity bills you say? How terrifying!

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: Phage

Mills made additional discoveries that caused him to abandon that plan. You can see in that article he's projecting 2 cents per kilowatt-hour based on that old technology. With this unit he's projecting around .01 cents per kilowatt hour or less. This new unit is also built to be mobile, for use in vehicles, while the old system was not.

And 2 cents per kilowatt-hour would not have helped people in the meantime so therefor he never released anything of it? I agree with phage here. Lots of promises but it reminds me of the goalpost that 2012'ers kept moving.

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
Funny you would think someone on the verge of making trillions of dollars would be able to afford a better room.

The first mac was made in a garage, and it looked like this:

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
Funny you would think someone on the verge of making trillions of dollars would be able to afford a better room.

The first mac was made in a garage, and it looked like this:

The first Mac existed and actually worked. Apple didn't spend 20 years making extraordinary claims with absolutely nothing to show for whilst stuffing their pockets with investment money.

originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: smurfy

That would be incorrect. Everything is not energy.

Consider the Schumann resonance. It's the product of something being conductive and having a certain shape and size. It's much like the emptiness in a cup.

There's no energy involved in that condition existing. And it's not some magical thing that energy flows from, despite thousands of woo sites mooing about it being some font of existence, or more amusing, something you can hear.

How empty is the cup?

Anyway take it up with those who disagree with you,

NOTHING IS SOLID & EVERYTHING IS ENERGY – SCIENTISTS EXPLAIN THE WORLD OF QUANTUM PHYSICS.

www.collective-evolution.com...

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: smurfy

That would be incorrect. Everything is not energy.

Consider the Schumann resonance. It's the product of something being conductive and having a certain shape and size. It's much like the emptiness in a cup.

There's no energy involved in that condition existing. And it's not some magical thing that energy flows from, despite thousands of woo sites mooing about it being some font of existence, or more amusing, something you can hear.

How empty is the cup?

Anyway take it up with those who disagree with you,

NOTHING IS SOLID & EVERYTHING IS ENERGY – SCIENTISTS EXPLAIN THE WORLD OF QUANTUM PHYSICS.

www.collective-evolution.com...

You're citing the unscientific garbage that is collective-evolution.com. Not exactly helping your case.

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: smurfy

That would be incorrect. Everything is not energy.

Consider the Schumann resonance. It's the product of something being conductive and having a certain shape and size. It's much like the emptiness in a cup.

There's no energy involved in that condition existing. And it's not some magical thing that energy flows from, despite thousands of woo sites mooing about it being some font of existence, or more amusing, something you can hear.

How empty is the cup?

Anyway take it up with those who disagree with you,

NOTHING IS SOLID & EVERYTHING IS ENERGY – SCIENTISTS EXPLAIN THE WORLD OF QUANTUM PHYSICS.

www.collective-evolution.com...

From the article:

Quantum physicists discovered that physical atoms are made up of vortices of energy that are constantly spinning and vibrating, each one radiating its own unique energy signature. Therefore, if we really want to observe ourselves and find out what we are, we are really beings of energy and vibration, radiating our own unique energy signature -this is fact and is what quantum physics has shown us time and time again.

yikes....as GetHyped says, this isnt helping your argument mate.

originally posted by: GetHyped

You're citing the unscientific garbage that is collective-evolution.com. Not exactly helping your case.

Perhaps not, that doesn't bother me, but it does make people think on it, and no, it's not something Einstein said, as is often quoted, but he did say this,
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."
I think that quite profound. Man makes his science as he goes on, yet the science is already there courtesy of this Universe, which we know so little of. That leaves some room for a bit of argy bargy amongst the scientific community, a discussion rather than the incontravertables in the area of these so-called 'Hydrinos'
Instead, what we got here was, it's rubbish, it's not up for discussion, he's a crook...blah blah, then the usual put downs on a scientist, because he did some research on it, (courtesy of NASA) just to make it seem less important.
Anyway, time will tell.

a reply to: smurfy

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."

Pretty hard to find him actually saying that either. It seems that what he actually said, in a letter to the family of a friend who had died, was something along the lines of:

Now he has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.

en.wikipedia.org...

Quite in holding with his ideas on spacetime (and a quite beautiful sentiment). On the other hand, reality as an illusion, not so much.

Wow that old Mac looks just like my highly modded A1200 only mine's in aloominum, can burn multiple CD's & plays MP3s even though they werent invented yet, designed by the guys from Commodore who went on to Apple, and without them you wouldn't have the Mac Damn i missed a good job there, but i digress.
Back on subject, well yes we are living in a reality we create ourselves, we (and especially so-called 'scientists) live in a secular world of our own learnings & beliefs, trying to convince a physicist that maybe Einstein was wrong is like trying to get a jewish person to eat a bacon sandwhich: It's not gonna happen.

Heed the words of the great Tesla; "All is vibration" and of course he's right.....
LOL

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

He could produce some electricity, for starters.

And characterize the chemical and physical properties of the waste product, and ship some to independent laboratories; this waste product whose purported explanation violates the laws of quantum mechanics.

And perhaps explain why it's never been seen in a stellar spectrum.

a reply to: smurfy

If "everything in the universe is 'Energy'" then that word has no useful meaning any more than saying "everything in the universe is Blork", for some unspecified and unclear and unactionable definition of Blork.

In truth, science today believes that nearly(*) everything in the universe is a consequence of a certain number of quantum fields in the Standard Model, whose excitations (this is precisely defined though unintuitive) can be called 'particles' along with certain specific interaction terms which themselves induce stuff like 'particles'.

(*) There are phenomenological observations whose placeholder explanations are "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy", and it is not clear if they can be accommodated in the Standard Model or minimal extensions thereof.