3 ms·

Dark matter is possibly the best evidence in support of Dr. Mills' Hydrino theory https://brilliantlightpower.com/theory/ https://brilliantlightpower.com/theory

Dark matter is possibly the best evidence in support of Dr. Mills' Hydrino theory https://brilliantlightpower.com/theory/ https://brilliantlightpower.com/theory/ which deserves a fair reading. There are about 20 experimental results supporting this theory that models electron orbits as spherical shells instead of probability clouds. He has machines that produce 100s of kW from small quantities of hydrogen - 200 times the energy produced by burning hydrogen. https://brilliantlightpower.com/tpv-suncell-rectanguloid-cavity-blackbody-radiator/ https://brilliantlightpower.com/tpv-suncell-rectanguloid-cav...

tux3 5y ago
In 1999, the Nobel prize winning physicist Philip Warren Anderson said he is "sure that it's a fraud",[12] and in the same year another Nobel prize winning physicist, Steven Chu, called it "extremely unlikely".[23] The following year, a 2000 patent based on its hydrino-related technology[24][25] was later withdrawn by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) due to contradictions with known physics laws and other concerns about the viability of the described processes, citing Park and others.[26] Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliant_Light_Power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliant_Light_Power Every submission you've made seems to be about this company (https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=dave333 https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=dave333).
- dave333 5y ago
  So how do these Nobel prize winners explain dark matter? Do "known physics laws" not evolve as new discoveries are made? Wikipedia is policed by skeptics that only support the status quo. IMO that article is not a fair description of Brilliant Light Power. As for my submissions, if as I believe hydrinos turn out to be real, it will be the greatest scientific discovery since the genome, so worth harping on about.

tux3 5y ago

In 1999, the Nobel prize winning physicist Philip Warren Anderson said he is "sure that it's a fraud",[12] and in the same year another Nobel prize winning physicist, Steven Chu, called it "extremely unlikely".[23] The following year, a 2000 patent based on its hydrino-related technology[24][25] was later withdrawn by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) due to contradictions with known physics laws and other concerns about the viability of the described processes, citing Park and others.[26] Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliant_Light_Power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliant_Light_Power Every submission you've made seems to be about this company (https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=dave333 https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=dave333).

dave333 5y ago
So how do these Nobel prize winners explain dark matter? Do "known physics laws" not evolve as new discoveries are made? Wikipedia is policed by skeptics that only support the status quo. IMO that article is not a fair description of Brilliant Light Power. As for my submissions, if as I believe hydrinos turn out to be real, it will be the greatest scientific discovery since the genome, so worth harping on about.