Genius Inventor: The controversy about the work of Randell Mills, America's Newton, in historical and contemporary context

356 Pages·2006·29.031 MB·English

by  Thomas E. Stolper

Genius
Inventor
The controversy about the
work of Randell Mills,
America's Newton, in
historical and contemporary
context
Thomas E. Stolper

Genius Inventor
The controversy abollt the work of
Randell Mills, America's Newton, in
historical and contemporary context
Copyright © 2006 by Thomas E. Stolper.
All rights reserved.
To the honors program at the University of Michigan. Ann Arbor. in college daJs
so long ago but not forgotten. and to its 1I1ltiied science program. whose teachers
made me real ize that one cOlild think abollt science and mathematics in a s('rious \\ay
without being a professional (E. I::.Moise. !\tkinson. Berry, and Gordus. P. V. C.
Hough. arc YOli still out there?). as did its students. in particular the lak Ernest
Coleman. !Clio"'; mathematics lIndergrad and later professional Ph.D. physicist.
conversations with whom Ihave olien recalled during: study of the Mills albir.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
Illustrations and Animations orCQM available at www.blacklightpower.com
Acknowledgments VI
Abbreviations VII
Introduction
1. Mills Surfaces in the Misleading Context of Cold Fusion 4
A. Announcement 4
B. Interest Sparked 6
I) Foundation of HydroCatalysis Power Corp. (now BlackLight Power) 6
2) Thermacore 8
3) Sheldon Apsell 10
C. False Identification with Cold Fusion II
I) First article in Fusion Technology 12
2) Vesco Noninski 12
3) Robert Bush 14
2. Cold Fusion Rejected 15
A. By Hot Fusioneers 15
B. By Other Mainstream Scientists ]8
I) Nuclear claims: a fat and easy target 18
2) Langmuir's pathological science 19
3) N rays 20
4) Polywater 22
5) 17 keV neutrino 23
6) Fifth force 25
7) Allison effect 26
8) Langmuir again 28
C. By the U.S. Government 29
I) Department of Energy and its Energy Research Advisory Board 29
2) No National Cold Fusion Institute 30
3) Patent Office 31
4) National Labs: two partial exceptions 32
D. By the Media 32
I) Gary Taubes' book 32
2) Mills ignored or treated as part of the cold fusion story 34
a) In print 34
b) On the air 36
II Gel/ills 111\'(:1110,.
E. Thc Confusion or Frontier Scicncc: Wrong Turns. Missed Opportunities 38
I) Great diniculty or replicating Fleischmann and Pons
2) Calorimetry: the measurement of"heat
3) Recombination
a)Jonesat Brigham Young University
b) Shkecliat [3ose
c) Niedra atNASA
4) Tritium
5) Protons
6) Transmutations
F. Fermi. Hahn. Meitner and Fission 56
G. Nomenclature 59
II. Cold Fusion Fifteen Years Oll\\ard: the DOE's 2004 Revie\\ 62
3. Mills Rejected by theCold Fusionecrs 64
A. Theorists: Wild Theorizing 64
I) Fleischmann 64
2) Hagcbtein 66
3) H)drino~ rejected. variants proposed 06
n. Experimenters 69
I) Robert Bush again 69
2) Reiko Notoya 70
J) Japan's New Ilydrogen Energy Project 7J
4) Electric Power ResearchInstitute (EPRI) 74
5) Cravens. Patterson.andCETI
6) Piantelli and Fiat 76
7) Mitchell S\\artz 78
8) Ohlllori andMi/lll1o 79
C. Cold Fusion Media 80
D. PatentCompetition andthe Force Fiekls of"Money 82
E. Cold Fusion: What \Vent Wrong? Banishment andthe Wrong Theory 8-i
4. Mills Rejected by the Ph)sicists 80
A. Wrong Creclel1lials 86
I) Early lire andcollege 86
2) Harvard Medical School 88
J) Electrical engineering rather than physics 8<.)
4) Too broadband 91
5) Technology rather than theory <.)'l
a) Mossoauer-Isotopic ResonantAbsorption of Gamma Emissions 92
b) Resonant Magnetic Susceptibility Imaging. 4-Dimensional MRI 96
6) Biotech rather than physics high tech 98
a)Genomic sequencing 98
b) Luminides 99
7) Young and Helmholtz 102
B. Unacceptable Theory 105
I) High-temperature superconductivity 105
Table a/Contents
III
2) Self-publication 108
3) Hydrogen 110
4) Not rigorous enough 112
5) Too classical and empirical 114
6) A different interpretation of uncertainty 117
7) Bell's theorem and nonlocality 120
8) A new definition of time 122
9) Losing a piece of one's mind 123
10) Back to the future 126
C. Heroic Aura of the Standard Theory 127
D. Tribalism and Socialization 132
E. Lakatos' Law 135
I) Graduate school faculties 135
2) Andrew Wiles and Fermat's Last Theorem 137
3) Top quark 141
4) Steven Weinberg 142
5) Keynes 144
6) Insiders 146
7) Philosophical biases 147
8) Bernstein's criteria 149
9) Avoiding ostracism 152
F. Scientific journals and publishers 153
G. Astrophysics: Hydrinos in Space 155
I) EUV rocket and satellite data 155
2) The Farrell. Mills & Good paper 159
3) Glycine in space 161
H. Gravity and Antigravity 162
1) Faraday and Einstein 163
2) Too difficult a problem 166
3) Cravens' report 168
4) Inertia 171
5) Witteborn/Fairbank experiment 173
6) Black holes 176
7) Randell and Ginger 177
8) Future work 178
I. Henderson's Innovation Filters 179
J. Too Practical and Verifiable 180
1) Unlike string theory 181
2) Ionization energies 181
K. Mills' Weakness: Gilding the Lily 182
L. Organized Skepticism 183
5. Reception of Groundbreaking Ideas 186
A. Why Hasn't This Been Noticed Before? 186
1)Pitohui birds and yeast 187
2) The canopy 187
3) Origins of insect !light 188
IV Gcnius !In'('l/fOl'
4) 11uckyballs 189
:5)Electron spin 190
6) ew kinds of lightning 192
7) Poisson's bright spot; Afshar's experiment 192
~) Noticed but not understood 195
9) No unt'(xeseensurprises 197
B. Noticed Too Soon: Penicillin 199
C. Other Pioneers 200
I) The Wright Brothers 200
2) The Maxwdlians 203
3) Alfven 208
4) Feynman 209
5) Ne\\ton 211
6) Einstein: the pioneer's uream 214
7) Ramanujan 216
8) Semmelweis: apioneer's nightmare 217
D. Filimoncllko: A Pioneer CioesAstray? 218
6. Slow (irowth of Doubts about SchrcSdingerQuantum Mechanics 221
A. Oppenheimer 221
B. Schrodinger Ilimself "'''l'')
C. Dirac 218
D. Feynman 224
E. Mysticism 225
I) Zukav 225
2) Bohm 228
3) [3rianGreene 229
F. Problems of theStanuaru Model 230
I) Too big 230
2) Boredom 232
3) Mass 236
G. Problems of Cosmology 239
I) Dark matter 240
2) Cosmological constant anddark energ.y 242
3) Incompatibility with General Relativity 243
7. Mills Withdraws 247
A. A New Program of Research 248
B. Xerox Analogy 24S
C. Two Strong Confirmations of Mills Suppressed 250
I) Jacox atthe Idaho ational Engineering Lab 250
2) Ilaideman at MIT"s Lincoln L.ab 251
D. Gas Diffusion Cell 256
1::. Commercialization and Financing Problems 257
1) Ilabel'andtheammonia analogy 257
2) Needham and Kealey on science, capitalism. andgovernment 258
F. Ilydrinos in the Lab 260
Table 0.(Contents v
G. Gas-Phase Cells 261
H. Oregon Foray 262
I. Penn State 263
J. Private Life 264
8. Mills Returns 266
A. Name Change, Website, and New Funding 266
B. Hydrino Compounds; Neutron DitTraction Analysis 267
C. Two Unexpected Confirmations? 270
I) Plasma electrolysis 270
2) Sonofusion 272
D. Artificial Intelligence: BlackLight Brainchild 276
E. Crackpot Patrol 276
I) Robel1 Park 276
2) Peter Zimmerman 281
3) Paul Grant 285
4) Junior members: Pibel, Barth, and McMahon 286
5) Forbes and other media 287
F. Breaking the Blockade 289
I) Journals 289
2) Meetings 291
a) California. October 1999 291
b) Later meetings 293
3) New evidence of hydrinos 295
4) Jonathan Phillips at Los Alamos and University of New Mexico 296
5) The Europeans 298
G. Solar Corona Plasma Cell and Its Applications 299
I) Solar corona 299
2) Diamond films 300
3) Hydrino-terminated silicon and metals 302
4) Searching for electric power and heating devices 303
H. Patent Battle 304
I. BlackLight Rocket 309
J. Potential Lasers and Photovoltaic Cell 311
K. Inertial Confinement Fusion; Hydrogen Beams 312
L. Implications 314
I) Moller Skycar 315
2) Place of humans in the Universe 315
3) Sociology of science 316
4) Admirals of physics and the Royal avy 318
5) Other persons influential in energy policy 319
6) A last and sufficient resort? 322
M. Some Final Words. 324
Index 327
[Postscript] [339]
VI Genills In\'enfor
Acknowledg.m~llts.
Family and friends generously acted as sounding boards for the ideas and COIll-
ments in this book. and many people contributed to whatever understanding 01" its
subject I may have. but the controvasy surrounding it is ,till so bitter that I hesitate
to l11~ntion names here. having. already done so in some cases in the text and I"oot-
note~.