Randell Mills and the Search for Hydrino Energy by Brett Holverstott

Luke Setzer's picture
Submitted by Luke Setzer on Fri, 2016-09-09 12:17

Objectivists should read this book for two reasons.  First, the author traces the ill effects of Immanuel Kant through the centuries to contemporary science.  Second, given the current situation with global terror funded by Arab oil money, this book should interest political wonks as well as science geeks.  The author never touches this particular implication of long-term defunding of terrorism by abandoning oil, but astute readers will see it immediately.  This book review is also posted on Amazon.

For decades, Dr. Randell Mills has flummoxed both supporters and detractors with his dogged determination not only to prove the existence of a new state of hydrogen, the hydrino, but also to harness its power for the betterment of the human condition. I have followed the hydrino story since initially encountering it in a Mensa Bulletin letter in the late 1990s. Brett Holverstott, whose "scientific realism" philosophy should resonate with Objectivists, first caught word of Mills via a Webzine article entitled “The John Galt of Quantum Mechanics?” that I published about Mills at The Daily Objectivist on December 1, 1999. As a very young man, Holverstott found himself intrigued not only by the new science, but also by the controversy and politics centered on it. The intrigue motivated him to pursue a dual degree in chemistry and physics at Reed College in Oregon while occasionally referring to Mills’s massive tome, The Grand Unified Theory of Classical Quantum Mechanics, for contrast and insight against his classroom textbooks.

After three years of undergraduate school, Holverstott had the privilege of working directly for Mills as a laboratory science intern for 18 months in the mid-2000s, and continued to work remotely in subsequent years on the Millsian molecular modeling software. The experience left him firmly convinced of the reality of the hydrino, its motivating theory of classical physics on all scales, its more deeply underlying philosophical view of scientific realism, and the value of entrepreneurship. In fact, these last two discernments so moved Holverstott that he changed majors to philosophy, completed a thesis on scientific realism to graduate, and then completed graduate school in architecture to achieve his current career in that field. This total immersion of the author over his formative adult years into the Mills saga gives the author excellent grounding for a lucid, exhaustively researched, directly experiential story about Mills and his work.

Although Mills has for many years posted his ever-growing tome at no charge on the Web site of his company, Brilliant Light Power, most lay readers will find it far too dense to follow. This book by Holverstott offers a superb overview, in accessible language, of the salient points of the theory and its supporting experiments and empirical data. In addition, the biographical aspects of Mills as shared from the perspectives of the man himself and those who know him illuminate the motives behind his endless drive and boundless energy.

While Holverstott clearly admires Mills, he never makes the mistake of slipping into sycophantic adulation for the man. Mills has gained notoriety over many years for excessively optimistic forecasts of commercial viability of his discoveries, only to have projected milestones come and go with no product in sight. Holverstott justifiably takes Mills to task for this and other marketing blunders that only further provoke critics to blast him with any number of epithets ranging from incompetent to self-deluded to fraud. Holverstott assures the reader that he never saw any direct evidence of any of these, but understands how critics can see Mills posture himself in ways that leave him vulnerable to such attacks.

Between 2000 and 2010, with assistance from other fans of Mills, I formed and ran the Hydrino Study Group discussion list mentioned occasionally in the book. My initial vision in 2000 was for supporters and detractors to reach a civilized exchange and eventual agreement within about six months. Much as with the overly optimistic projections of Mills, my own projections failed to come to fruition even with a greatly extended timeline. As Holverstott notes repeatedly in his book, established scientists are human, and humans resist change. So the arguments generally circled endlessly and went nowhere, though both sides wished to continue debating even after I repeatedly asked if a list split would suit all better. After ten years, the other moderators and I found better things to do and closed the forum. Fortunately for interested parties, Mills participates in his own discussion forum, the Society for Classical Physics, available at no charge on his company Web site. Expect no critics tolerated there, however.

I currently cross my fingers without holding my breath that the SunCell in 2017 will indeed prove itself the “smoking gun” Mills has long sought to demonstrate at last the truth of the hydrino on a wide scale. A clean, cheap, limitless, decentralized power source will solve a myriad of current problems facing the human species. A cogent, reality-oriented physical theory will solve many others.

Read this book and tell all your friends to do the same. If they like it, have them also read America's Newton: The Reception of the Work of Randell Mills, in Historical and Contemporary Context by Thomas Stolper, a book I hope Stolper updates and re-publishes soon to capture the latest aspects of the Mills narrative. For further insights into the philosophical corruption of physics that led to what Holverstott calls “The Quantum Quagmire,” read The Logical Leap: Induction in Physics by David Harriman.

( categories: )

California State University at Fresno Talk by Dr. Mills

Luke Setzer's picture

There was a mainstream

Andrew Atkin's picture

There was a mainstream documentary a while back on a guy called Stan Mayer. He created a "water splitter device" that gave effective free energy, apparently. I understand the U.S military took it seriously and gave him some kind of contract with it, which seems remarkable. Would they do that if it was a con?

Anyway, my thinking on it goes like this: If you can efficiently separate hydrogen and oxygen from water, then what you ultimately have, potentially, is a form of atomic energy. This can make sense, as what we call chemical-potential energy is ultimately atomic energy...

Hence it's not a crazy idea if someone can find a way to very efficiently split the water molecule, and I don't think we're in a position to say that is impossible.

Note: Stan Meyer later claimed his device was ultimately a form of nuclear energy, and gave a very technical (incomprehensible) speech on it once that I saw online.

Part 1. http://www.youtube.com/SRE8ghD...

Personally, I doubt this 'hydrino' device works the way the inventor claims - he's speculating on the 'how'. But that does not mean it doesn't work. It could be going through some process like Meyer's device supposedly did.

Randell Mills on CNN

Luke Setzer's picture

DC Residents Save the Date December 6

Luke Setzer's picture

Science geeks might want to save the date for this event December 6 in Washington, DC:


It could be a real game-changer for power production globally.

New Developments at Brilliant Light Power 2016-10-27

Luke Setzer's picture

New Zealand Professor Presents Theory

Luke Setzer's picture

Hear the Author Talk with Skeptics

Luke Setzer's picture

Interested readers can now listen to the author's talk with the Seattle Skeptics at no charge.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.