Discussion of the hydrino theory of Dr. Randell Mills

Harut Pashayan | 1 May 2002 02:05

Re: Re: Goodbye David McMahon

I am a High School student who has been following HSG for a year or so and 
still don't know what the heck you guys are talking about. I have taken 
Calculus BC, so I have a feeble understanding of math, if it was compared to 
HSG members of course. Any suggestions of where to start. I am poor so I cannot 
buy the books somone has already suggested, so I would apreciate some wordy 
websites that may be able to clear my confusion. 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: peter zimmerman 
To: hydrino@... 
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 11:54 AM
Subject: HSG: Re: Goodbye David McMahon

> > ... As for me, I gave it my best shot -- thinking through what
> > RLMMD had to say. He's wrong, but his reasoning is interesting
>
>What part, in particular, of his reasoning do you find interesting?
>
>Paul

Ah, yes. You quoted me out of context, so my last reply was off topic. You 
see Niels Bohr, a very polite gentleman, would tell visitors with obviously 
incorrect (not to say lunatic) theories that their work was "interesting" in 
order not to give too much offense. In that sense RLMMD's work is 
"interesting."

If the "interesting" person persisted, Bohr was apt to respond that the 
person had "told us more than you realize."

pz

(Continue reading)

headers

TERRY OLLER | 2 May 2002 19:54

ACS Pitch

The recent ACS pitch is at the BLP site under Tech Papers. There is new data on the PPC power converter and some
new data on the chemicals.

Terry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

headers

Tstolper | 2 May 2002 03:30

Re: Goodbye David McMahon

In message 4368, Peter Zimmerman wrote that he had always assumed that Mills 
had no proprietary interest in the HSG.

My understanding has been that Luther Setzer is the sole list owner, and that 
he, Steve Florek, and Paul Scott are the only persons with control over what 
gets posted to the HSG and what doesn't. Is that still true?

Tom Stolper
BA math, MA polisci

[Yes. None of us have any financial interest in BLP either. -SF]

headers

peter zimmerman | 1 May 2002 16:32

Re: Re: Science News - Exact Heisenberg Uncertainty


>
>Hi Dr. Zimmerman,
>
>peter zimmerman wrote:
>
>
>I haven't claimed a reliable deduction - I am reasoning on what little *is* 
>there.

/\/\/\/ It is generally considered wise to have read the actual paper before 
beginning to interpret the paper. Since we have no way of knowing what "is" 
there based on a press report, not to wait is irresponsible at worst, and a 
waste of thinking time at best.

>Take it for a merely interesting news item if you wish. The article does 
>refer
>to a published paper though, which implies it is not wholly fabricated and 
>which
>can presumeably be obtained to challenge or uphold the basis of my 
>reasoning.
>It is possible that the journalist who made this report screwed it up
>completely so that my reasoning is inappropriate. I do think that the
>above statement I made regarding the nature of CQM is still basicly valid 
>though.
>
>
> >
> > B) If CQM is wholly deterministic, then how to you account for the
> > statistical nature of radioactive decay? Is it true that there is a

(Continue reading)

headers

peter zimmerman | 1 May 2002 16:33

Re: Re: Science News - Exact Heisenberg Uncertainty


>PZ wrote:
># B) If CQM is wholly deterministic, then how to you account for the
># statistical nature of radioactive decay? Is it true that there is a 
>hidden
># clock in every nucleus which tells when it will decay?
>
>Yes, of course.
>
>Do you imagine that there is some other conceivable explanation?
>

\/\/\ Of course I can think of other better explanations. Read Gamow's 
analysis of alpha decay.

pz

>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

headers

tim_perdue | 1 May 2002 14:49

Summary / Status of BLP Science?

Good morning,

I have been reading the back postings and researching BLP on the 
web. It does not appear that Dr. Mills' theories are anywhere near 
universally accepted yet.

That being said, has the BLP process been independently verified? 
What about independent verification of anomalous energy output?

I'm asking because I am curious if Dr. Mills' efforts will lead to a 
successful product and revision of physics in the future.

You may also email me privately at spam-tim <at> p.yahoo.invalid (remove spam-
).

Regards,

Tim Perdue

headers

John A. Kassebaum | 3 May 2002 00:01

Lasetron Could Let Scientists See Into Atomic Nucleus

FYI

<http://unisci.com/stories/20022/0502024.htm>

I wonder what we will see when we look into the nucleus of an atom.

[Maybe a radioactivity clock. -SF]

-John

--

-- 
John A. Kassebaum
Project Engineer, DVD/Video Group
OpenGlobe, Inc. (An Escient Technologies Affiliate)
6325 Digital Way
Indianapolis, IN 46278
USA
(317) 616-6519 Direct Phone & Fax
(317) 616-6789 Main
mailto:JKassebaum <at> O...

headers

John A. Kassebaum | 1 May 2002 17:46

Re: Re: Re: Goodbye David McMahon

Harut Pashayan wrote:

> I am a High School student who has been following HSG for a year or so and 
> still don't know what the heck you guys are talking about. I have taken 
> Calculus BC, so I have a feeble understanding of math, if it was compared to 
> HSG members of course. Any suggestions of where to start. I am poor so I cannot 
> buy the books somone has already suggested, so I would apreciate some wordy 
> websites that may be able to clear my confusion. 

Hi Harut,

Here are come sites you might like to check out:

http://www.treasure-troves.com/
http://www.cs.unb.ca/~alopez-o/math-faq/mathtext/math-faq.html

http://www2.corepower.com:8080/~relfaq/

http://www.webelements.com/

http://www.mathphysics.com/

This site has a math library as well as software you might find useful.
BTW - There is a fairly inexpensive student edition of the Mathematica software.
http://www.wolfram.com/

-John

--

-- 
John A. Kassebaum

(Continue reading)

headers

peter zimmerman | 1 May 2002 16:38

Re: Re: Science News - Exact Heisenberg Uncertainty

I doubt that anybody has done precisely those experiments, but in the years 
following Becquerel's discovery of radioactivity people certainly looked at 
decay curves of short-lived isotopes kept under different thermal, etc., 
conditions.

pz

>From: "novel_compound" <novel_compound <at> y.yahoo.invalid>
>Reply-To: hydrino@...
>To: hydrino@...
>Subject: HSG: Re: Science News - Exact Heisenberg Uncertainty
>Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 21:10:53 -0000
>
>pz wrote:
>
> > If CQM is wholly deterministic, then how to you account for the
> > statistical nature of radioactive decay? Is it true that there is
> > a hidden clock in every nucleus which tells when it will decay?
>
>Off-the-wall idea: Has anyone ever taken two samples of radioactive
>material, kept one immersed in a cryogenic fluid, and kept the other
>in a blast furnace, then calculated the half-lives of the two samples
>to see if there is a slight dependency on temperature?
>
>
>
>
>Hydrino Study Group (HSG):
>A serious look at the novel theory of Dr. Randell Mills.
> Web Site http://www.hydrino.org

(Continue reading)

headers

John A. Kassebaum | 3 May 2002 00:33

Re: Re: Science News - Exact Heisenberg Uncertainty

peter zimmerman wrote:

> 
>>peter zimmerman wrote:
>>
>>
>>I haven't claimed a reliable deduction - I am reasoning on what little *is* 
>>there.
> 
> /\/\/\/ It is generally considered wise to have read the actual paper before 
> beginning to interpret the paper. Since we have no way of knowing what "is" 
> there based on a press report, not to wait is irresponsible at worst, and a 
> waste of thinking time at best.

It was news article for heaven's sake. In any case I *have* read the paper in the arxiv.
See my previous post on the 30th if you need the link. It looks to be supportive of the
news article, and the info in the news article seems sufficient for back-of-the-envelope
level speculative reasoning. I'm afraid you can't discredit this one that easily.

>>
>>>B) If CQM is wholly deterministic, then how to you account for the
>>>statistical nature of radioactive decay? Is it true that there is a 
>>>hidden clock in every nucleus which tells when it will decay?
>>>
>>>pz
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Even fully deterministic systems are not predictable. The areas of
>>'Complexity Theory' and 'Chaos' constitute the study of deteministic

(Continue reading)

59	December 2008
72	November 2008
101	October 2008
89	September 2008
146	August 2008
118	July 2008
192	June 2008
166	May 2008
67	April 2008
37	March 2008
45	February 2008
80	January 2008
39	December 2007
123	November 2007
36	October 2007
50	September 2007
29	August 2007
90	July 2007
27	June 2007
56	May 2007
71	April 2007
84	March 2007
40	February 2007
53	January 2007
41	December 2006
48	November 2006
119	October 2006
40	September 2006
95	August 2006
278	July 2006
124	June 2006
171	May 2006
186	April 2006
309	March 2006
191	February 2006
307	January 2006
214	December 2005
395	November 2005
56	October 2005
64	September 2005
171	August 2005
35	July 2005
96	June 2005
131	May 2005
115	April 2005
91	March 2005
25	February 2005
63	January 2005
35	December 2004
64	November 2004
454	October 2004
122	September 2004
221	August 2004
188	July 2004
60	June 2004
116	May 2004
137	April 2004
20	March 2004
32	February 2004
41	January 2004
71	December 2003
130	November 2003
239	October 2003
320	September 2003
206	August 2003
162	July 2003
261	June 2003
524	May 2003
118	April 2003
120	March 2003
154	February 2003
193	January 2003
103	December 2002
32	November 2002
31	October 2002
66	September 2002
50	August 2002
92	July 2002
110	June 2002
93	May 2002
176	April 2002
209	March 2002
104	February 2002
207	January 2002
128	December 2001
102	November 2001
37	October 2001
51	September 2001
164	August 2001
521	July 2001
460	June 2001
320	May 2001
103	April 2001
177	March 2001
42	February 2001
124	January 2001
37	December 2000
76	November 2000
194	October 2000
161	September 2000
157	August 2000
33	July 2000
232	June 2000
203	May 2000
157	April 2000
45	March 2000

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun

		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31