New Discovery Disproves Quantum Theory?

[aristotle-dude]

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.

News Article - The Guardian

[j.nudd]

Very interesting. I'm not gonna masqaurade as a quantum-genius, but i thoguht quantum mechanics wasn't totally accepted anyway as it doesn't work at greater size scales, thus the quest for "a theory of everything." So, he's kinda disproven a theory that was already not totally accepted, right?

[aristotle-dude]

I'm not sure.

Some people on slashdot are calling this a crackpot theory but apparently Nasa is doing research on hydrinos as well.

Mind you, I don't think most of the people on slashdot have a clue about the theories involved. I'm taking a wait and see attitude concerning this.

Don't forget that most people on slashdot don't even read the articles before commenting on them. :D

[ev0|]

These guys have been around forever, they're crackpots.

[remix17]

Nothing would make me happier than to see quantum theory disproved, but I highly doubt this proves anything.

[j.nudd]

Nothing would make me happier than to see quantum theory disproved, but I highly doubt this proves anything.

586780793[/snapback]

Why? It's rather useful at the subatomic level.

[remix17]

Why? It's rather useful at the subatomic level.

586780867[/snapback]

What about all the paradoxes that contradict common sense ? I mean how can I accept uncertainty in science ?

[Magister]

What about all the paradoxes that contradict common sense ? I mean how can I accept uncertainty in science ?

586784100[/snapback]

But science IS uncertainty.... otherwise we'd never question or explore anything!

Not too long ago the Speed of sound was a hard physical limit that was absolute, not any longer, same with the speed of light... someday it will either fall, or be worked around... personally I think Quantum physics (and possibly string theory) can and will explain a lot about the order of existance.... once we evolve enough, and learn enough to be able to understand the concepts.

[j.nudd]

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is a very fundamental principle in Quantum Theory. I agree, all science is uncertain, as this is a probablistic universe. You can never be 100% sure of anything in this universe. When DNA techs try to identify someone's DNA, they don't say "this is the man," they say "there is a 1 in 40 billion chance it is not the man."

[JohnsonBox]

If you asked us "believe it or not," that would be a religous question. Without enough evidence and verification made in different labs worldwide, we cannot say yes or no.

I am optimistic, but guarded.

[j.nudd]

If you asked us "believe it or not," that would be a religous question. Without enough evidence and verification made in different labs worldwide, we cannot say yes or no.

  I am optimistic, but guarded.

586785347[/snapback]

How are you relating Quantum Theory to a religious question?

[JohnsonBox]

How are you relating Quantum Theory to a religious question?

586785520[/snapback]

Science is to be proved by evidence and accurate data, without which you cannot request others to believe any theories made by you. Otherwise you act like a religious, not a scientist.

[j.nudd]

Science is to be proved by evidence and accurate data, without which you cannot request others to believe any theories made by you. Otherwise you act like a religious, not a scientist.

586795157[/snapback]

ok, i just got confused why you said religious. So you're saying that asking people to believe Quantum Theory is like asking people to believe in God; there's just no way to prove it?

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

well this is certainly interesting, cant wait to see it develop further and see whether or not its true...

[Glowstick]

You know, people have claimed a lot in the past, just to disappear from the surface with their pockets full of money. Let's just wait until it's demonstrated, preliminary verified and, if you have the time, peer reviewed.

[Glowstick]

If you asked us "believe it or not," that would be a religous question. Without enough evidence and verification made in different labs worldwide, we cannot say yes or no.

Uh, quantum mechanics have quite a lot support FOR their existance. They're even making practical life a mess for some people, just ask your favorite microchip designer.

[raid517]

I think I see a man taking a wheelbarrow's worth of a lot of very gullable people's money to the bank - and clicking his heels in happiness along the way.

History has been full of scams and con men like this. The web is full of stories of people who have invested in perpetual motion machines, or in energy sources that are more than 100% efficient (which is the case in this instance - and which also therefore defies the laws of themodynamics - which says incidentally that you can't get more energy out of a system than you put in). They have all come and gone (as has their money) but the quantum theory has stood firm.

I also however would be happy to see QM disproved - but for a different reason. My motivations are purely scientific - because if it were ever disproved, this would simply mean for me that it will almost inevtiably been replaced by a much better, more comprehensive, and more accurate theory. But that is just the way science works - we can only every trully progress by disproving our previous theories and replacing them with better ones. So in this sense no theory - not even QM can ever really be considered absolute.

I freely confess though that I am one of those people who 'never read the article' - but again only because I have read about so many similar scams/stories in the past - and no doubt I will read about and hear many similar scams again in the future.

If however you are looking for real scientific insight try reading a reputable scientific journal like Nature, or The New Scientist, of Scientific American - rather than looking for sensationalist stories like this on the web - because if there is any real new science to be found, these are the places where you are most likely to first hear about it.

Best regards,

GJ

[Glowstick]

I freely confess though that I am one of those people who 'never read the article' - but again only because I have read about so many similar scams/stories in the past - and no doubt I will read about and hear many similar scams again in the future.

If you'll read it, you'll run into stuff like peer-reviews and lab confirmations. But that's not something I'd trust the Guardian to have properly researched and verified. It's already hilarious enough that the "Hydrino Study Group" uses Yahoo Groups for discussions.

This just sounds like a better dihydrogen-monoxide story.

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

interesting, i might be going to UNC Asheville so ill have to ask the chemist they mentioned there about this stuff...