Quote from: GI-Thruster on 04/25/2009 03:28 amI suppose it's possible BLP might be looking at LENR but that would only explain the energy. It would not explain how Mill's model is so much more accurate in predicting molecular bonding energies than the Bohr model.Sooner or later folks, one needs to look at the actual evidence. . .Can you point to any studies by particle physicists in a reputable lab observing hydrogen becoming hydrinos?
I suppose it's possible BLP might be looking at LENR but that would only explain the energy. It would not explain how Mill's model is so much more accurate in predicting molecular bonding energies than the Bohr model.Sooner or later folks, one needs to look at the actual evidence. . .
I don't want to get into a contest over this stuff but I think it's pretty telling that most of the folks who seem to object violently to BLP have yet to actually look at the evidence. Don't you?
They've already sold two commercial licenses. You'd think before an electrical utility forks out tens of millions in cash they'd want some evidence. But you say there is none. I bet you looked really carefully too. Poor electrical utilities. . .C'est domage.
The only thing that looks fishy in the least at BLP is the physics. Everything else has a lot of reasons to trust.
I don't trust BLP at their word except when, for example, my friends at CIA tell me that their board reads like a fortune 50 company and that none of these guys would ever dare get involved with something that isn't above board.
These are ex-CIA senior officers, ex-CEO's from places like Johnson and Johnson and Westinghouse IIRC. Why would guys like that risk their reputations selling a scam?
All with no evidence and completely ignoring the evidence for the science.
The first commercial-grade pilot reactor plant is scheduled to start up this year. Has been for some time.
As it turns out, since I'm a philosopher and did careful study in epistemology about how and why this sort of thing happens, I should not be surprised.
3) Stop making vain appeals to authority.
...snip pointless ramble about philosophy of science...
Forget what everyone else thinks and look at the evidence for yourself.
He is deliberately misleading his audience. The salient fact Barth is hiding from his audience here is that Mills did not pluck his theory from the air but rather, he was reading Maxwell when he discovered Schrodinger was wrong.
"This is all irrelevant to the simple question at hand: Has blacklight presented objectively reproducible evidence to support their extraordinary claims ?"No. That is not the question at hand. I have repeatedly stated I am not advocating for BLP. The question is whether it is intellectually justified for people to accuse people they don't know, and groups they know nothing about of pseudo-science, fraud and lying. You've now moved from accusing BLP of pseudo-science and fraud, to accusing me of lying--all with no evidence.You see the problem here?
I will admit one thing I would advocate for with regards BLP and that is, someone at NASA to consider replacing JIMO with a spacecraft using a BLP driven power system.I always thought JIMO was a great idea. If we're to learn more about our planetary system, we have to have these more capable spacecraft with KW's of power aboard rather than a few watts. JIMO was scrapped because it was just so spendy--more than a billion dollars. Imagine if the power system could be replaced cheaply? A few of these 50 Kw reactors and their subsequent sub systems are apparently not going to cost much. You can do direct plasma-dynamic conversion to electricity so very little radiator mass is needed. No need to build an enormous spacecraft. It seems to me if we could take BLP's word for a thumbnail sketch study, we'd learn what it would take to build and fly a JIMO-like mission without a nuke. Also, if indeed their reactor works the way it's claimed to, this is a fabulous opportunity to improve VASMIR by a couple orders magnitude thrust efficiency. Imagine if we had a JIMO like craft capable of both huge thrusts and super high Isp's, that drew it's power from the stuff it uses as plasma?I don't know about you but I think this is all worth some investigation and its not as if BLP has been hiding from the scientific establishment. I'd bet anyone who has the skills to do a JIMO type mockup could get the answers they need from guys like Peter Jansson as well as from BLP.
In Barth's shabby analysis linked above, he makes the claim that the spectrum identified by Mills et al is not above the noise floor of the apparatus used to examine, but he never says what the readings were nor what the noise floor was so his claim is likewise suspect. That was not a piece of science Barth posted online.