Jan Rasmussen wrote:
>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0%2C3605%2C1627424%2C00.html
>
> Fuel's paradise? Power source that turns physics on its head
>
> · Scientist says device disproves quantum theory
> · Opponents claim idea is result of wrong maths
>
> Alok Jha, science correspondent
> Friday November 4, 2005
> The Guardian
>
>
> 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.
> Randell Mills, a Harvard University medic who also studied electrical engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, claims
> to have built a prototype power source that generates up to 1,000 times more heat than conventional fuel. Independent scientists
> claim to have verified the experiments and Dr Mills says that his company, Blacklight Power, has tens of millions of dollars in
> investment lined up to bring the idea to market. And he claims to be just months away from unveiling his creation.
>
> The problem is that according to the rules of quantum mechanics, the physics that governs the behaviour of atoms, the idea is
> theoretically impossible. "Physicists are quite conservative. It's not easy to convince them to change a theory that is accepted for
> 50 to 60 years. I don't think [Mills's] theory should be supported," said Jan Naudts, a theoretical physicist at the University of
> Antwerp.
>
> What has much of the physics world up in arms is Dr Mills's claim that he has produced a new form of hydrogen, the simplest of all
> the atoms, with just a single proton circled by one electron. In his "hydrino", the electron sits a little closer to the proton than
> normal, and the formation of the new atoms from traditional hydrogen releases huge amounts of energy.
>
> This is scientific heresy. According to quantum mechanics, electrons can only exist in an atom in strictly defined orbits, and the
> shortest distance allowed between the proton and electron in hydrogen is fixed. The two particles are simply not allowed to get any
> closer.
>
> According to Dr Mills, there can be only one explanation: quantum mechanics must be wrong. "We've done a lot of testing. We've got
> 50 independent validation reports, we've got 65 peer-reviewed journal articles," he said. "We ran into this theoretical resistance
> and there are some vested interests here. People are very strong and fervent protectors of this [quantum] theory that they use."
>
> Rick Maas, a chemist at the University of North Carolina at Asheville (UNC) who specialises in sustainable energy sources, was
> allowed unfettered access to Blacklight's laboratories this year. "We went in with a healthy amount of scepticism. While it would
> certainly be nice if this were true, in my position as head of a research institution, I really wouldn't want to make a mistake. The
> last thing I want is to be remembered as the person who derailed a lot of sustainable energy investment into something that wasn't
> real."
>
> But Prof Maas and Randy Booker, a UNC physicist, left under no doubt about Dr Mill's claims. "All of us who are not quantum
> physicists are looking at Dr Mills's data and we find it very compelling," said Prof Maas. "Dr Booker and I have both put our
> professional reputations on the line as far as that goes."
>
> Dr Mills's idea goes against almost a century of thinking. When scientists developed the theory of quantum mechanics they described
> a world where measuring the exact position or energy of a particle was impossible and where the laws of classical physics had no
> effect. The theory has been hailed as one of the 20th century's greatest achievements.
>
> But it is an achievement Dr Mills thinks is flawed. He turned back to earlier classical physics to develop a theory which, unlike
> quantum mechanics, allows an electron to move much closer to the proton at the heart of a hydrogen atom and, in doing so, release
> the substantial amounts of energy he seeks to exploit. Dr Mills's theory, known as classical quantum mechanics and published in the
> journal Physics Essays in 2003, has been criticised most publicly by Andreas Rathke of the European Space Agency. In a damning
> critique published recently in the New Journal of Physics, he argued that Dr Mills's theory was the result of mathematical mistakes.
>
> Dr Mills argues that there are plenty of flaws in Dr Rathke's critique. "His paper's riddled with mistakes. We've had other
> physicists contact him and say this is embarrassing to the journal and [Dr Rathke] won't respond," said Dr Mills.
>
> While the theoretical tangle is unlikely to resolve itself soon, those wanting to exploit the technology are pushing ahead. "We
> would like to understand it from an academic standpoint and then we would like to be able to use the implications to actually
> produce energy products," said Prof Maas. "The companies that are lining up behind this are household names."
>
> Dr Mills will not go into details of who is investing in his research but rumours suggest a range of US power companies. It is well
> known also that Nasa's institute of advanced concepts has funded research into finding a way of using Blacklight's technology to
> power rockets.
>
> According to Prof Maas, the first product built with Blacklight's technology, which will be available in as little as four years,
> will be a household heater. As the technology is scaled up, he says, bigger furnaces will be able to boil water and turn turbines to
> produce electricity.
>
> In a recent economic forecast, Prof Maas calculated that hydrino energy would cost around 1.2 cents (0.7p) per kilowatt hour. This
> compares to an average of 5 cents per kWh for coal and 6 cents for nuclear energy.
>
> "If it's wrong, it will be proven wrong," said Kert Davies, research director of Greenpeace USA. "But if it's right, it is so
> important that all else falls away. It has the potential to solve our dependence on oil. Our stance is of cautious optimism."
>
>
>
> Jan Rasmussen
>
>
Det kunne være interessant hvis de havde præsteret nogle resultater de sidste 15
år som andre kunne replikere :)