Environment, GUT-CP, hydrino, HydrinoDollars, HydrinoEconomy, Philosophy, physics, Planet Earth, Randell Mills, technology

HydrinoDollars…. I CANNOT BELEIVE WHAT I AM READING! (Randy Mills, Hydrino Technology & Society for Classical Physics)

“I honestly cannot believe what I am reading!  I am honestly reading this with tears in my eyes… … I mean… they aren’t taking on the Iron Throne… their taking on the Iron Bank!… … … I’m not saying anything!…
“For the first time in human history the power of the Sun has been brought down to Planet Earth” ;D

iron1

Society for Classical Physics, Conversation, Topics, Hydrino Technology
Hydrino Technology
Expand Messages

Randy Mills

Message 1 of 54 , Sep 19

Richest 1% now owns half the worlds wealth.pdf

Interesting number:

$280 T
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/14/richest-1-percent-now-own-half-the-worlds-wealth.html

World energy commodity cost ~10 T X PE multiplier of 28 = $280 T

Hydrino Technology could be worth more than the world¹s total wealth.
alexjcombs

Sep 19

View Source

Plus, as you very well know, hydrino technology will be the best and biggest example of Jevons paradox of all time. Congratulations on the recent progress!
Ed

Sep 19

View Source

You’ve got a machine that creates wealth with no deleterious side-effects, out of thin air, literally. The central bankers have mechanisms for creating the appearance of wealth out of nothing, with many obscure and unpredictable side-effects. I think people will like yours better.

On 9/19/2018 9:56 AM, Randy Mills rmills@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] wrote:

Show message history
James Bowery

Sep 19

View Source

14,000 = 2017 world total energy production in million tons of oil equivalent
8,800 = 1990 ”
It would be interesting to see the trend in world wealth over the same interval. It would also be interesting to see more complete estimates of world energy elasticity.

Here are the only world energy elasticity figures a search on that phrase turned up (page 15):

2001 – 2009

Show message history
Ed

Sep 20

View Source

Jevons Paradox applies when there is an improvement with which a resource is utilized. The expectation is that with the amount of the resource, energy, required for usage reduced (due to technological innovation), that the total amount required would drop, but he opposite occurs.
But here, the efficiency with which energy is utilized is expected to drop, due to the reduction in cost, both direct and indirect (such as environmental), so Jevons Paradox does not apply.

On 9/19/2018 11:14 AM, alexjcombs@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] wrote:

Show message history
Randy Mills

Sep 20

View Source

Thanks

on behalf of “alexjcombs@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics]”
Subject: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

Plus, as you very well know, hydrino technology will be the best and biggest example of Jevons paradox of all time. Congratulations on the recent progress!
alexjcombs

Sep 20

View Source

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I suppose I should have just been more succinct: total global energy usage will soar far above current levels as the hydrino technology proliferates.
Randy Mills

Sep 20

View Source

It would also enable new markets such as personal aerial transport that would likely consume more power than all current usages combined.

From: <alexjcombs@…>

Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I suppose I should have just been more succinct: total global energy usage will soar far above current levels as the hydrino technology proliferates.
contrarianrob

Sep 21

View Source

Interesting, and rather frustrating, that just as the perfect energy source is looming on the horizon, the perfect energy sink is growing exponentially, that’s bitcoin. Leave it to people to invent a completely useless ‘crypto currency’ mining process that wastes massive amounts of real energy. Imagine a future filled with SunCell powered server farm bitcoin mining operations. Nightmare. Perhaps Dr. Mills can do us a favor and refuse to lease SunCells for bitcoin mining. Please!
James Bowery

Sep 21

View Source

China’s August industrial power consumption up 8.8 pct y/y
Show message history
Ed

Sep 21

View Source

{OK. bitcoin is far enough away from CP that we don’t want to start a new thread on this topic. John Farrell, Moderator}

Cryptocurrency is a new industry. It is in direct competition with some of the most powerful, influential and obscured institutions in the world, the central bankers. I remember when Al Gore was telling us that the power supplies that we leave plugged into the wall, inactive, without drawing any power from them, were wasting a vast amount of energy, like more than 10% of electricity used. This was hot air, promoted by that self-appointed guardian of our social conscience. The reality is closer to 1%.
The “news” we receive requires examination and filtering. Propaganda is a real thing, serving hidden purposes. I suggest asking cui bono?, then “how can this be measured?”. The average temperature of the planet is a number bandied about frequently by concerned advocates of climate warming/change/cooling, but the specifics of how those temperatures were measured over such a long span of time, during population explosion; the fact that those thermometers are almost all concentrated in areas of industrialization, road building and heat shedding, are pretty tough to weigh into the calculation of average temperature. The temperature is going to change, in any case, and 0.8C change in 100 years seems pretty stable to me. But, what do I know? I’m not even a politician.
I have no doubt that cryptocurrency mining consumes a lot of power. The computers that run the banking systems, the credit card companies, etc. that provide us with the current fiat monetary system also consume a lot of power. If cryptocurrencies succeed in a big way, the legacy system would fade in significance, saving a lot of power, and I would not mind seeing that. There is reason to suspect that the statements about cryptocurrency power usage may be inflated. Because cryptocurrency is a new technology, it resembles the beginning of auto manufacture, or PC manufacture. After a while, most of the early builders were gone. The great quality improvement of cars and PCs over time is something we all know, and they still can improve vastly, thanks to the application of correct science (GUTCP). Profit margins for cryptocurrency mining have dropped sharply, compared to the early days. Many coins do not use such energy intensive mining practices. Energy efficiency of miners is way up from what it was. In the long term, it is not clear (to me, at least), what kind of energy usage will be required, when limited issue coins have stopped mining new coins, and there is much less competition as the world decides what cryptocurrencies to use. It may wind up using less energy than the legacy banking system.
If you want to attack a big waste of energy (and everything else), start with war-mongering, and examine the links to central banking. Be careful to distinguish between babies and bathwater.

On 9/21/2018 10:06 AM, contrarianrob@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] wrote:

Show message history
Randy Mills

Sep 21

View Source

Could use the power to mine asteroids and go back to the gold standard.

on behalf of contrarianrob@… :
Show message history
optiongeek

Sep 21

View Source
Mining a single asteroid could saturate the world’s demand for gold and seriously degrade its price. As a store of value I think Bitcoin is far more likely to hold up over time. Of course there are idiots out there who think Quantum Computing is going to render crypto obsolete. But we know better.

—In SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com, <rmills@…> wrote :

Could use the power to mine asteroids and go back to the gold standard.

on behalf of contrarianrob@… :
Show message history
Peter Ruhe

Sep 21

View Source

One interesting side-effect of bitcoin mining was the intense
competition to develop more-efficient parallel processing chips, to
grab more of the mining profits. There was, and maybe still is, a
strong positive feedback loop where bitcoin mining profits fed back
into chip development. There might be spin-offs into more useful
products, similar to how the useless space race had spin-offs.

Perhaps SunCell power will indeed enable economical asteroid mining,
which would start a positive-feedback loop for space travel.
Randy wrote on 2018-09-21 3:29 PM:

Show message history
mailpete405

Sep 22

View Source

I wonder if personal aerial transport really would increase energy consumption. Personal aerial transport could be expected to move lighter weight vehicles over considerably shorter distances. Ground based transport over road systems is extremely inefficient just based on circuitous routes with significant additional losses due to friction at the wheels and fuel weight.

The major limiting factors for aerial transport today are combustion engine/fuel weight or battery weight, and the structure to support that weight. A small lightweight power source solves that problem.

More direct aerial travel with efficient directional and velocity stacking at various altitudes has the possibility of making transport, especially personal transport, far more efficient. We’d also be able to recover a significant amount of land currently wasted on small local road systems. That is a lot of bridges, asphalt, cement, road paint, reflectors, and stoplights that would no longer need to be installed and maintained. Severe weather damage recovery could be much faster and more efficient. Daily commute time and traffic accidents could be reduced significantly.

As technology improves, there is still potential for tremendous energy and resource savings, despite access to a cheap and accessible energy source. Having enough copper for the move to all electric motors, as we leave combustion engines behind… that’s the next challenge.
Randy Mills

Sep 22

View Source

Recycle the grid.
Show message history
Randy Mills

Sep 22

View Source

Since the dollar is the standard for oil, the new petrodollar could be the hydrino kWh. The value could be very stable. It is pegged to a real commodity just like oil, gold, silver.

on behalf of “ronnotel@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics]”
To: “SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com” <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology
Mining a single asteroid could saturate the world’s demand for gold and seriously degrade its price. As a store of value I think Bitcoin is far more likely to hold up over time. Of course there are idiots out there who think Quantum Computing is going to render crypto obsolete. But we know better.

—In SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com, <rmills@…> wrote :

Could use the power to mine asteroids and go back to the gold standard.

on behalf of contrarianrob@… :
Show message history

Randy Mills

Sep 22

View Source

Can also pull gold from the ocean:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Haber

In the 1920s, Haber searched exhaustively for a method to extract gold from sea water, and published a number of scientific papers on the subject. After years of research, he concluded that the concentration of gold dissolved in sea water was much lower than those reported by earlier researchers, and that gold extraction from sea water was uneconomic.[6]:91–98
on behalf of “ronnotel@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics]”
To: “SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com” <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology
Mining a single asteroid could saturate the world’s demand for gold and seriously degrade its price. As a store of value I think Bitcoin is far more likely to hold up over time. Of course there are idiots out there who think Quantum Computing is going to render crypto obsolete. But we know better.

—In SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com, <rmills@…> wrote :

Could use the power to mine asteroids and go back to the gold standard.

on behalf of contrarianrob@… :
Show message history

contrarianrob

Sep 22

View Source

I was not really serious about banning bitcoin mining. Of course you should sell power to anyone who wants to buy it. But the SunCell would really open up the whole solar system to exploration and colonization especially the outer solar system since solar energy is too weak there yet hydrogen is abundant.
James Bowery

Sep 22

View Source

A sound monetary system and political economy has the following operationally defined characteristics. It can be implemented with blockchain technology. However, making it robust in the face of EMP attack requires a fallback system, most likely implemented at the county level.
Citizens shall periodically be issued an equal citizen’s dividend in an amount as set forth in §7 below. Further explanation: “Citizens” are a class of individuals vested with the privileges described herein, and the implied responsibility to defend property rights. At a minimum Citizens are first responders, such as police, deputies, military, firefighters and reserves.
Individuals claiming property rights shall declare them.
The owner has sole authority to transfer his property. (No eminent domain authority.)
The highest escrowed bid for a property right shall be its assessed value.
Owners shall periodically, coinciding with §1, pay demurrage on the assessed value of their properties. The money as high bids in escrow do not pay demurrage.
The demurrage rate shall be established by vote of citizens.
The amount of the citizen’s dividend shall be established by vote of citizens with the intent that the cost of homesteading be held constant. Demurrage paid in excess of that issued in §1 reduces the money supply by the excess amount. Conversely, demurrage paid in deficit to that issued in §1 increases the money supply by the deficit amount. — Further explanation: “Homesteading” is defined as that which provides, at least and on average, replacement reproduction. “Replacement reproduction” is defined as neutral evolutionarily consequence. “Evolutionary consequence” may include any cultural or biological values that citizens consider salient. Homesteading cost is therefore that which is necessary to, at least and on average, maintain intergenerational value.
Patents of invention assigned to the inventor do not pay demurrage.
Show message history
jchiefsteward

Sep 22

View Source

Ive mentioned this before on here when the topic was Silver and how to gain access to enough supply. I said at the time this would be possible through transmutations. So I say now that copper could be supplied through transmutations. Russian teams have been specialising in this area and claim to be making progress. Their aim however is to obtain platinum through transmutations as they can make more money. Still copper would be possible.
ico.synthestech.com
Just so you know, I am a keen follower of Mills and BrLP. I am also interested in Lenr. I think both show equal potentail.
marinaskevin

Sep 22

View Source

It might be better to create such an “energy currency” in proportion to installed power rather than creating it in proportion accumulated energy produced. This way the supply of money correlates with the size of the economy, which in turn correlates the most with power, not energy. Also, in a power or energy based money system, people will transact using a form of representative money, and it is way easier to track the growth of installed power as opposed to the cumulative production and waste of energy. Also, a KWH today is worth more than a KWH tomorrow, which in turn is worth more than a KWH the day after tomorrow, and so on. Therefore, a KW of installed power represents not an infinite net present value, but a finite net present value, as required in order to be represented in terms of money.

If the cryptocurrencies are used, there should be a law stating that for every 1 KW of power dedicated to securing the blockchain, the entity responsible must also supply x number of KW. Third-party smart devices and IoT could be used to validate said production. This will prevent cryptocurrencies from overtaking energy consumption. It will also encourage blockchain security to be as decentralized as the electric power used to produce it.
—In SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com, <rmills@…> wrote :

Since the dollar is the standard for oil, the new petrodollar could be the hydrino kWh. The value could be very stable. It is pegged to a real commodity just like oil, gold, silver.

on behalf of “ronnotel@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics]”
To: “SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com” <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology
Mining a single asteroid could saturate the world’s demand for gold and seriously degrade its price. As a store of value I think Bitcoin is far more likely to hold up over time. Of course there are idiots out there who think Quantum Computing is going to render crypto obsolete. But we know better.

—In SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com, <rmills@…> wrote :

Could use the power to mine asteroids and go back to the gold standard.

on behalf of contrarianrob@… :
Show message history

Ed
A good currency is many things, among them
Sep 22

Randy Mills

Sep 22

View Source

I just glanced at it, but there was prior talk about using bitcoin as a means to establish hydrino power units as a currency. How would that work?

From: James Bowery <jabowery@…>
Date: Saturday, September 22, 2018 at 1:22 PM
To: Society for Classical Physics <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

A sound monetary system and political economy has the following operationally defined characteristics. It can be implemented with blockchain technology. However, making it robust in the face of EMP attack requires a fallback system, most likely implemented at the county level.
Citizens shall periodically be issued an equal citizen’s dividend in an amount as set forth in §7 below. Further explanation: “Citizens” are a class of individuals vested with the privileges described herein, and the implied responsibility to defend property rights. At a minimum Citizens are first responders, such as police, deputies, military, firefighters and reserves.
Individuals claiming property rights shall declare them.
The owner has sole authority to transfer his property. (No eminent domain authority.)
The highest escrowed bid for a property right shall be its assessed value.
Owners shall periodically, coinciding with §1, pay demurrage on the assessed value of their properties. The money as high bids in escrow do not pay demurrage.
The demurrage rate shall be established by vote of citizens.
The amount of the citizen’s dividend shall be established by vote of citizens with the intent that the cost of homesteading be held constant. Demurrage paid in excess of that issued in §1 reduces the money supply by the excess amount. Conversely, demurrage paid in deficit to that issued in §1 increases the money supply by the deficit amount. — Further explanation: “Homesteading” is defined as that which provides, at least and on average, replacement reproduction. “Replacement reproduction” is defined as neutral evolutionarily consequence. “Evolutionary consequence” may include any cultural or biological values that citizens consider salient. Homesteading cost is therefore that which is necessary to, at least and on average, maintain intergenerational value.
Patents of invention assigned to the inventor do not pay demurrage.

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 8:48 PM, ronnotel@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Show message history

James Bowery
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 6:39 PM marinaskevin@yahoo.com [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] … This is a degenerate case
Sep 22

William Miller

Sep 22

View Source

What grid?
The grid will be obsolete in most of our lifetimes… My own, hopefully, included.

Sent from my iPad
Ed

Sep 22

View Source

It has been a popular thing to create cryptocurrencies for many specific purposes, such as Dentacoin for dentists. The idea has some appeal, like coupons that various businesses issue, as token currency, as a form of advertisement. Does BrLP want to compete with established cryptocurrencies by creating their own stable of crypto experts, to deal with the regulatory agencies, or rather take advantage of a successful existing cryptocurrency? Is BrLP going to need to advertise using a branded cryptocurrency, when there is literally no competition? No, so why bother with a new token?
What would create a parallel to the petrodollar is if BrLP, like OPEC, decides to simply favor to some degree, payment in a particular cryptocurrency, like a small discount if payment is made in that cryptocoin. Just as everyone used to need USD to get oil, whatever cryptocurrency is favored by BrLP would be in universal demand, a de facto world reserve cryptocurrency. It would allow the buyer to avoid currency exchange cost. I would think that the best move is to not reinvent the wheel, but use the best wheel available, to stay focused on what BrLP does best, science and engineering.
One of the biggest problems of cryptocurrency is that there are so many of them. Bitcoin dominates in terms of capitalization, but not in functionality or utility. It has the name people trust. If BrLP favors a particular cryptocurrency, like with petrodollar, it would be a serious endorsement. If the inventor who brought the world sun in a bottle likes a particular cryptocoin, who would argue?
The designated cryptocoin would explode in value, and readers of this forum would have a way to profit from our support of BrLP, which is really good, as probably most of us (like me) are not able to buy BrLP stock prior to the IPO.
On 9/22/2018 2:40 PM, marinaskevin@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] wrote:

Show message history
Randy Mills

Sep 22

View Source

Transmutation requires an atomic reactor and the products are thousands of
dollars for trace amounts:
http://www.perkinelmer.com/category/radiochemicals
On 9/22/18, 2:17 PM, “on behalf of jchiefsteward@…
[SocietyforClassicalPhysics]” <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
wrote:
Show message history
Randy Mills

Sep 22

View Source

>>The GUTCP enables innovation such as hydrino technology. On inspection innovation drives employment. The US has the most innovation and lowest unemployment. Not much going on in the real third world, and they have the highest unemployment.

Reply-To:<SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, September 22, 2018 at 5:07 PM
To: “SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com” <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

A good currency is many things, among them transportable, or transferrable. A hydrino-kWh lacks a digital linkage, but it qualifies well in most of the categories. Being tied to electrical output, which represents economic activity, would make it inherently elastic in a way that is not politically determined. Acceptance of a hydrino-kWh-cryptocurrency, once the world begins to shift to the use of hydrino technology, would be welcomed by many as a way to de-politicize the exchange of value. It would be at least as gradual as the conversion away from scarce and dangerous carbon- and nuclear-based energies, so it would not add to that de-stabilization. Hydrino technology obsoletes wind-, solar-, and bio-energies, freeing up a lot of human effort for other things. To make the conversion away from fiat would be to gradually remove the same weapon from all governments that use a central bank (no more currency wars that lead to trade wars, and often kinetic warfare), and concurrently reduce scarcity of life’s necessities with hydrino technology. With a lot less desperate people, extremist and terrorist agitators would have many fewer prospects for recruitment.
The challenge of what to do with so much free time is not trivial. Can humans handle a much better life, free from the daily struggle to survive? Fewer jobs would exist, and they would require greater intelligence, so the old problem of how to direct the energy of young men, especially, becomes paramount. We are pretty good at diversions.

On 9/22/2018 10:36 AM, Randy Mills rmills@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] wrote:

Show message history
Bob Bell

Sep 23

View Source

Hi Randy,

Rather than transmutation, I really like the idea of ridding the world of toxic wastes by having power so cheap that we can dissociate the waste at the atomic scale and end up with harmless molecules.

Do you view this as a practical application of Hydrino Power technology and atomic/molecular science as you know it?

nailogmij

Sep 23

View Source

Concerning using the electricity provided by the SunCell to mine bitcoin…

Bitcoin miners are susceptible to price swings. Bitcoin can drop 30% in a day. So to reduce risk what some bitcoin miners do of is sell bitcoin mining contracts at a locked in rate. They can mine profitably while pushing off the risk to the investor. For example, an investor can buy 5 years of continuous mining for a flat fee (plus maintenance) and they will received mined bitcoins based on how much “hashpower” they invest in.

Hashpower is a term that investors/consumers use. However, internally the big players also focus on “power” as a metric. Bitcoin mining facilities are usually measures in wattage capability. The more power you have the more hashpower you can generate. So the analogy is that these bitcoins, are created from power, and these contracts for hashes are actually contracts for power. It is still early in the industry but these power/hash/future contracts can be traded between investors.
Randy Mills

Sep 23

View Source

I was thinking along the lines that the US dollar is pegged to the hydrino kWh and we keep the dollar. Once the SunCell mesh network replaces the centralized servers, then security should be high due to the redundant nodes and decentralization.

From: <Jimmy.Winn@…>
Date: Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 1:49 PM
To: <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

Concerning using the electricity provided by the SunCell to mine bitcoin…

Bitcoin miners are susceptible to price swings. Bitcoin can drop 30% in a day. So to reduce risk what some bitcoin miners do of is sell bitcoin mining contracts at a locked in rate. They can mine profitably while pushing off the risk to the investor. For example, an investor can buy 5 years of continuous mining for a flat fee (plus maintenance) and they will received mined bitcoins based on how much “hashpower” they invest in.

Hashpower is a term that investors/consumers use. However, internally the big players also focus on “power” as a metric. Bitcoin mining facilities are usually measures in wattage capability. The more power you have the more hashpower you can generate. So the analogy is that these bitcoins, are created from power, and these contracts for hashes are actually contracts for power. It is still early in the industry but these power/hash/future contracts can be traded between investors.
A Murphy

Sep 23

View Source

Think we are seriously putting several carts before the horse. Still lots of tough engineering, logistics, regulatory stakeholdering to go before a robust, industrial strength, continuous safe energy source arrives at scale.
When that does happen (and it will likely be about 5 years before it starts to dent mature energy markets), a lot of industries and technologies will be disrupted.
The effect of hydrino power will be deeply felt economically, technologically, environmentally, geopolitically and of course will shake academic institutional foundations. These effects are going to be so cross-elastic that it is very hard to predict how things like bitcoin will shake out.

“What is good, Phaedrus, and what is not good, need we ask anyone to tell us these things?”
Show message history
Concerning using the electricity provided by the SunCell to mine bitcoin…

Bitcoin miners are susceptible to price swings. Bitcoin can drop 30% in a day. So to reduce risk what some bitcoin miners do of is sell bitcoin mining contracts at a locked in rate. They can mine profitably while pushing off the risk to the investor. For example, an investor can buy 5 years of continuous mining for a flat fee (plus maintenance) and they will received mined bitcoins based on how much “hashpower” they invest in.

Hashpower is a term that investors/consumers use. However, internally the big players also focus on “power” as a metric. Bitcoin mining facilities are usually measures in wattage capability. The more power you have the more hashpower you can generate. So the analogy is that these bitcoins, are created from power, and these contracts for hashes are actually contracts for power. It is still early in the industry but these power/hash/future contracts can be traded between investors.

amack43

Sep 23

View Source

Others are trying to set up an energy based cryptocurrency. Power Ledger in Australia is one that is trying a peer to peer system with “Sparkz”. I’m still not sure what to make of cryptocurrency. It seems it exists to merely create billionaires out of its founders by setting a set amount of original bitcoins or whatever and permit nonsense trading to drive the value up to ludicrous levels without any real value underpinning the pricing. It also permits kidnappers and ransomware virus designers to demand the transfer of money they hope is untraceable.

I haven’t really thought this through but If BrLP was to create a currency, at least it could be linked to the production capacity in kW of Suncells which also ultimately governs the pricing of the kWh. Creating more Suncells would be the equivalent of printing money. Since BrLP owns or intends to own every Suncell, BrLP becomes a global Central Bank with a global currency backed by its ownership of assets that have an immense capital and income value. How they rest of the world would react to that I’m not sure. Perhaps a Global Reserve Bank Company could be set up with BrLP holding a majority of ownership and the remaining stock divided between the Government controlled Reserve Banks of each member country based on their Suncell usage. It might encourage massive and rapid Suncell electrification of the third world as member states install Suncells to get their share of the river of gold from Suncell energy sales. Sadly oil income dependent countries would probably go bankrupt. Shame.
—In SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com, <rmills@…> wrote :

I was thinking along the lines that the US dollar is pegged to the hydrino kWh and we keep the dollar. Once the SunCell mesh network replaces the centralized servers, then security should be high due to the redundant nodes and decentralization.

Ed

Sep 23

View Source

A Murphy is correct that we are focusing on problems that are well into the future, and not knowable. The baby is just getting born, and must learn to crawl, to walk, etc. However, here is food for thought.
The petrodollar (Henry Kissinger’s brainchild) was an effective mechanism for prolonging the existing US dollar world reserve currency status, made necessary by the US going off the gold standard in 1971. The US world reserve currency status was established at the Bretton-Woods conference in 1944, along with the IMF. The reason a world reserve currency is required is to settle accounts in international trade. Unfortunately (or fortunately), there is a privilege for the holder of the reserve currency, as it is the most popular currency, because everybody needs it. The USD was an obvious choice, given the world dominating position held after WWII. History shows that the the countries holding the reserve currency uniformly abuse that privilege, and the US is no exception.
I agree with Randy that the US has a most innovative society, and is the world leader in many respects. It is right for a loyal citizen to support his own country.
The economist Triffin observed a problem that appears inevitable for the holder of the world reserve currency. That country must provide a great deal of extra currency to fill the needs of the entire world to have a money that is “good as gold”, that is universally trusted. The conflict of interest between domestic and international economics tends to wind up with a situation like the US has, “printing” money in exchange for manufactured goods, endlessly, resulting in an eventual revaluation of the currency. We are seeing it now, in currency wars and trade wars, with countries moving away from USD hegemony, setting up trade agreements to bypass the USD, and selling of USD reserves by foreign countries, as well as reclaiming of their gold from US vaults. Pegging the US dollar to hydrino kWh would likely stabilize the USD, for the foreseeable future. Unfortunately, it would not cure the shortsighted tendency that humans have to abuse reserve currency status.
The IMF and World Bank and other international governing economic/financial/monetary institutions are planned to create a world reserve currency in their control, the Special Drawing Rights (SDR), an elite banker’s money. Bitcoin (at least in the minds of some early proponents) rose in popularity initially not as a way to produce fast cash, but as a way to counterbalance the extreme power that is focusing into the hands of such institutions. Cryptocurrencies are a technology, like electronic banking or email, a replacement for antiquated ways of exchanging value. The blockchain is the core algorithmic tool that is finding vast application in creating systems that can create trustworthy systems without government supervision. This can assure valid exchanges of information. Cryptocurrency would be appropriate for the continuous flood of international payments required by the users of hydrino technology lease holders, to help assure reliable payment and uninterrupted service.
I believe this matter deserves careful thought, as it deeply concerned Randy’s predecessor, Isaac Newton, who was Master of the Royal Mint. He introduced reforms that stabilized and enhanced the banking foundations for the British Empire. Perhaps the world is moving past the age of empires, and toward a universal order. The best results will require not only the best minds, but such minds that are universally recognized as such.

On 9/23/2018 4:02 PM, Randy Mills rmills@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] wrote:

Show message history
alexjcombs

Sep 24

View Source

The US government is unlikely to permit an explicit peg of the dollar to the hydrino kWh. The US government and banks very much enjoy and indeed rely on the Federal Reserve’s ability to create base money ex nihilo, and the commercial bank’s ability to do the same when they extend loans. A true peg of the dollar to the hydrino kWh would require the surrendering of this ability to create money out of thin air, with severe consequences for a financial system that has come to rely on ever increasing amounts of debt.

I think an implicit relationship to the hydrino kWh is will be the US government’s preferred policy option, and the same plays from the petrodollar playbook will be used. Hydrino technology is the most geopolitically significant to come along since the advent of atomic weapons. The hydrinodollar will likely be viewed as a key pillar of US strategy to remain the dominant global superpower.

It is possible to represent real world assets such as rights to X kWh of hydrino energy on distributed ledger technology such as Bitcoin. One example of how this works can be found here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Colored_Coins. However, the throughput of these blockchains is currently insufficient to make this practical. For example, depending on transaction size, Bitcoin is only capable of 4-7 transactions per second. Various approaches are being taken to allow greater throughput on distributed ledgers, but these will take time.

In my opinion, the most relevant use case of cryptocurrency for BLP that I’m aware of is mimicking an interesting business model already in use in Africa. There is a digital currency (not a cryptocurrency, as it is centrally controlled) called M-Pesa that is widely used throughout parts of that continent. M-Pesa works via basic feature phones. Money can quickly and easily be sent to any phone number via text message. Various companies lease goods like solar powered lanterns that have embedded cellular chips. Lessees are required to make periodic up front payments to permit continued use of these products. I can see BLP putting this model to good use in countries with poorly developed banking systems and/or poor rule of law. It would make collecting payment far easier and safer, and permit more granular billing than a monthly lease.
James Bowery
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 6:14 AM Ed waldo234@centurylink.net [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] … The underlying
Sep 24

nailogmij

Sep 24

View Source

There is a name for that type of decentralized currency and it’s called an “appcoin” or “utility coin”. Right now there some appcoins that provide a service such as cloud storage, computing power, etc. For example, Filecoin and Storj are app coins that provide file storage on the cloud. If you own or buy some Filecoins you can use these coins to buy some gigabytes of cloud storage.

So you could attach miners to SunCells and have them mine HydrinoCoins. These HydrinoCoins can be sold on the free market. BrLP can now accept these HydrinoCoins in exchange for power. Also, HydrinoCoins can be traded directly between investors, users, utility companies, large countries, etc.

Why would BrLP want to do this instead of just using USD? Well, Mills pointed out that the SunCell network would be completely decentralized so the mining system would also be very decentralized, more so than bitcoin or any other cryptocoin if implemented correctly. That means nothing will be able to take down this coin. If you sell a SunCell you would have to also sell the HydrinoCoinMiner(s) to go with the SunCell. The HydrinoCoinMiners would probably be small at first but I imagine it could be big and shipped in train freights.

HydrinoCoin, I imagine would have to be inflationary so the miners would always mine these coins and the supply would always increase. As for pegging the USD to HydrinoCoin that would have to be a government decision, similar to pegging the price of USD to gold. I would think HydrinoCoin is a hybrid of gold, oil, and bitcoin in terms of a commodity. If everyone used HydrinoCoins then every product found in stores can be priced in HydrinoCoin.
Randy Mills

Sep 25

View Source

Why the need to mine HydrinoCoins? Consider that the technology is worth $trillions, and Brilliant Light owns the intellectual property (IP) rights. It needs $trillions to replace the existing energy infrastructure. So, it buys SunCells, inverters, power conditioning equipment, installations, maintenance, other services, etc. with hydrinodollars wherein the hydrinodollars are accepted by Brilliant Light for hydrino kilowatt hours produced by leased equipment provided and maintained by Brilliant Light. Given the magnitude of the value of possibly $300T, the world converts over to use hydrinodollars for all transactions, and hydrinodollars becomes the reserve currency. In this scenario, Brilliant Light avoids equity financing or selling upfront IP rights to obtain capital to execute commercial deployment of SunCells. In the end, a dollar is the simplest contract for goods and services, and in the same manner hydrinodollars eliminates complex financial contracts and transactions to seamlessly permit commercialization.

on behalf of “Jimmy.Winn@…
Date: Monday, September 24, 2018 at 12:53 PM
To: “SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com” <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

There is a name for that type of decentralized currency and it’s called an “appcoin” or “utility coin”. Right now there some appcoins that provide a service such as cloud storage, computing power, etc. For example, Filecoin and Storj are app coins that provide file storage on the cloud. If you own or buy some Filecoins you can use these coins to buy some gigabytes of cloud storage.

So you could attach miners to SunCells and have them mine HydrinoCoins. These HydrinoCoins can be sold on the free market. BrLP can now accept these HydrinoCoins in exchange for power. Also, HydrinoCoins can be traded directly between investors, users, utility companies, large countries, etc.

Why would BrLP want to do this instead of just using USD? Well, Mills pointed out that the SunCell network would be completely decentralized so the mining system would also be very decentralized, more so than bitcoin or any other cryptocoin if implemented correctly. That means nothing will be able to take down this coin. If you sell a SunCell you would have to also sell the HydrinoCoinMiner(s) to go with the SunCell. The HydrinoCoinMiners would probably be small at first but I imagine it could be big and shipped in train freights.

HydrinoCoin, I imagine would have to be inflationary so the miners would always mine these coins and the supply would always increase. As for pegging the USD to HydrinoCoin that would have to be a government decision, similar to pegging the price of USD to gold. I would think HydrinoCoin is a hybrid of gold, oil, and bitcoin in terms of a commodity. If everyone used HydrinoCoins then every product found in stores can be priced in HydrinoCoin.
nailogmij

Sep 25

View Source

Some crypto coins are “instamined” meaning that all the coins are created at the genesis of their blockchain. There are advantages and disadvantages to a coin being instamined. One prominent instacoin, Ripple, created 100 billion ripples. When a coin is instamined you have to trust the creator of the coin to have only generated 100 billion ripples. When a block is mined like bitcoin, however, the trust is in the proof of the mathematics and cryptography, which can be independently verified by anyone. Bitcoin will only have ~21 million bitcoins and it can be verified. With Ripple, it cannot be verified. Also, since Ripple is not 100% verifiable they have been known to have a large gap within their blockchain database during the early years in its existence. Even though this discrepancy exists Ripple still has a marketcap of $20 billion because investors don’t care. In addition, coins that are usually instamined have centralized servers or a federation of servers to verify monetary transactions. For example, Ripple uses a network of distributed servers for verification. Control of the network relies on anyone who has the authority to run the server, perhaps with by granting permissions with cryptographic private key(s). Oppositely, a mined coin like bitcoin does not require authority or trust, and anyone with mining hardware can run a validation server. Permission is not required.

Probably the easiest strategy for BrLP is to instamine, for example, 1 billion Hydrinocoins. Distribute these coins proportionally to shareholders. This will bypass Wallstreet completely, and it is a good way to raise money very quickly. Cryptocurrency has been known to have 1000x more liquidity than traditional IPOs. The drawback is that the SEC will probably treat this as a security and BrLP will face regulatory push back. Many cryptocoin IPOs have made a lot of money this way and have gotten away with it, so I don’t really advise this unless you are ready to face legal battles.

If you don’t instamine and mine similarly to bitcoin, you are less likely to face legal repercussions because you never distribute coins directly. The free-to-download opensource software distributes the coins using an algorithm and anyone with the hardware resources can mint new coins. This is the harder approach and no other coin has been able to replicate this strategy as successfully as bitcoin.

Randy Mills

Sep 25

View Source

You are missing the point. Bitcoin does not have any value. Its only utility is that it facilities transactions. There is nothing backing it. Hydrinodollars would be backed by assets, the hydrino technology IP rights, worth potentially hundreds of trillions of real dollars. Hydrinodollars would be worth their face value in hydrino kWhs. That value can be exchanged for goods and services or traded for other currencies. The money supply would be limited by the total value of hydrino technology which in time could be more than all the current total wealth in the world. This scenario is much better than gold or US government back currencies due to the lesser total wealth securing the currencies in the latter cases..

From: <Jimmy.Winn@…>
Date: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 9:26 PM
To: <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

Some crypto coins are “instamined” meaning that all the coins are created at the genesis of their blockchain. There are advantages and disadvantages to a coin being instamined. One prominent instacoin, Ripple, created 100 billion ripples. When a coin is instamined you have to trust the creator of the coin to have only generated 100 billion ripples. When a block is mined like bitcoin, however, the trust is in the proof of the mathematics and cryptography, which can be independently verified by anyone. Bitcoin will only have ~21 million bitcoins and it can be verified. With Ripple, it cannot be verified. Also, since Ripple is not 100% verifiable they have been known to have a large gap within their blockchain database during the early years in its existence. Even though this discrepancy exists Ripple still has a marketcap of $20 billion because investors don’t care. In addition, coins that are usually instamined have centralized servers or a federation of servers to verify monetary transactions. For example, Ripple uses a network of distributed servers for verification. Control of the network relies on anyone who has the authority to run the server, perhaps with by granting permissions with cryptographic private key(s). Oppositely, a mined coin like bitcoin does not require authority or trust, and anyone with mining hardware can run a validation server. Permission is not required.

Probably the easiest strategy for BrLP is to instamine, for example, 1 billion Hydrinocoins. Distribute these coins proportionally to shareholders. This will bypass Wallstreet completely, and it is a good way to raise money very quickly. Cryptocurrency has been known to have 1000x more liquidity than traditional IPOs. The drawback is that the SEC will probably treat this as a security and BrLP will face regulatory push back. Many cryptocoin IPOs have made a lot of money this way and have gotten away with it, so I don’t really advise this unless you are ready to face legal battles.

If you don’t instamine and mine similarly to bitcoin, you are less likely to face legal repercussions because you never distribute coins directly. The free-to-download opensource software distributes the coins using an algorithm and anyone with the hardware resources can mint new coins. This is the harder approach and no other coin has been able to replicate this strategy as successfully as bitcoin.

marinaskevin

Sep 25

View Source

So, US dollars for Hydrinos, in preference to Euros or RMB? Possible sanctions if say, Iran, refuses to pay Hydrino energy in US dollars? How will this HydrinoDollar actually exist? Does it even make sense for a world reserve currency to be tied with the economy of a sovereign nation consisting of 5% of the world’s people?
herbert-hafner@gmx.de

Sep 26

View Source

I think this is correct. But there is a problem with really pursuing this path: there is an unexplicable amount of power associated with controlling the world reserve currency. Look what the US is doing to countries that dont want to trade their oil in dollar. You dont want to poke in that hornets nest!

In my opinion it is hard enough to turn all physics upside down. That is generating oposition strong enough. Having the finance sector with their deep political entanglements against you is probably not a good thing to risk.

My personal opinion is that we need a (interest free) currency described by Dr. Mills, but without control of the currency by a company or a state. A currency is infrastructure and infrastructure has to belong to the people. (Disclaimer: I am no communist…I am some kind of socio technocrat 🙂 )
neil_m_harper@hotmail.com

Sep 26

View Source

The growth of distributed ledger technology is inevitable and that it will not be controlled by a single government or company is also inevitable and essential. Development and success of this is a major software engineering challenge – please stick to and solve the engineering challenges of the getting the SunCell running. Indeed this discussion has already attracted the ridicule of the International Toxics Forum and would be perceived as a scam money grab on par with the Deneum crypto scam. Please stick to what you know.

Neil
Randy Mills

Sep 26

View Source

How do you trust that all bit coins are from the founding algorithm and not another, or one shifted by a constant for example? Furthermore, there are an infinite number of coin creation algorithms. For example, I start a stop watch. At each exact unique time point in spacetime of the evolution of the universe a coin is added according to the time t0 + an exact time internal with a bounded number of intervals. How about every interval of position of an object dropping over an exact distance in vacuum? So on and so on. And, in the end the coin is not backed by anything. Hydrino dollars carry the value of energy.

on behalf of “Jimmy.Winn@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics]
Reply-To: “SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com” <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups..com>
Date: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 9:26 PM
To: “SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com” <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

Some crypto coins are “instamined” meaning that all the coins are created at the genesis of their blockchain. There are advantages and disadvantages to a coin being instamined. One prominent instacoin, Ripple, created 100 billion ripples. When a coin is instamined you have to trust the creator of the coin to have only generated 100 billion ripples. When a block is mined like bitcoin, however, the trust is in the proof of the mathematics and cryptography, which can be independently verified by anyone. Bitcoin will only have ~21 million bitcoins and it can be verified. With Ripple, it cannot be verified. Also, since Ripple is not 100% verifiable they have been known to have a large gap within their blockchain database during the early years in its existence. Even though this discrepancy exists Ripple still has a marketcap of $20 billion because investors don’t care. In addition, coins that are usually instamined have centralized servers or a federation of servers to verify monetary transactions. For example, Ripple uses a network of distributed servers for verification. Control of the network relies on anyone who has the authority to run the server, perhaps with by granting permissions with cryptographic private key(s). Oppositely, a mined coin like bitcoin does not require authority or trust, and anyone with mining hardware can run a validation server. Permission is not required.

Probably the easiest strategy for BrLP is to instamine, for example, 1 billion Hydrinocoins. Distribute these coins proportionally to shareholders. This will bypass Wallstreet completely, and it is a good way to raise money very quickly. Cryptocurrency has been known to have 1000x more liquidity than traditional IPOs. The drawback is that the SEC will probably treat this as a security and BrLP will face regulatory push back. Many cryptocoin IPOs have made a lot of money this way and have gotten away with it, so I don’t really advise this unless you are ready to face legal battles.

If you don’t instamine and mine similarly to bitcoin, you are less likely to face legal repercussions because you never distribute coins directly. The free-to-download opensource software distributes the coins using an algorithm and anyone with the hardware resources can mint new coins. This is the harder approach and no other coin has been able to replicate this strategy as successfully as bitcoin.
Randy Mills

Sep 26

View Source

This is an academic discussion. Logical, not political at this juncture. See what is possible/practical, then consider politics.

Regarding owner ship. Once we trade hydrinodollars for goods and services, we no longer control them, but we have the obligation to deliver energy. They are just a simplified licensing contract, but have an inherent value, so they could serve to execute other unrelated transactions, just like dollars.
on behalf of “herbert-hafner@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics]”
Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 5:50 AM
To: “SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com” <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

I think this is correct. But there is a problem with really pursuing this path: there is an unexplicable amount of power associated with controlling the world reserve currency. Look what the US is doing to countries that dont want to trade their oil in dollar. You dont want to poke in that hornets nest!

In my opinion it is hard enough to turn all physics upside down. That is generating oposition strong enough. Having the finance sector with their deep political entanglements against you is probably not a good thing to risk.

My personal opinion is that we need a (interest free) currency described by Dr. Mills, but without control of the currency by a company or a state. A currency is infrastructure and infrastructure has to belong to the people. (Disclaimer: I am no communist…I am some kind of socio technocrat 🙂 )
Ed

Sep 26

View Source

The ideal of a cryptocurrency, as outlined in the quasi-mythical Satoshi Nakamoto’s White Paper is a peer-to-peer cash system without any central authority, but with a strict central force, as found in the blockchain. Ideally, it eliminates the political problems associated with a world reserve currency, while preserving the essential aspects of trustworthiness, fungibility, transferability, etc.
The value of anything is rooted in the belief in it. Oil is valuable for obvious reasons, so is IP. They have associated values. Cryptocurrency has value because people believe it can work as a form of currency superior to the fiat units that are empowered with the force of the state (you use fiat to pay taxes, i.e. legal tender). USD ultimately has value because of the coercive power of the state, like all fiat currencies. We believe in the power of the state because it is no joke.
Countries have tried to back their currencies with real estate, but it lacks fungibility, transferability and other qualities. Energy as a currency backing works better than real estate, but it is not a good store of value. It can be stored, but not in your wallet. It would need to be represented, so it always comes back to the need for a currency. The ability of hydrino IP to back currency is in its potential wealth, but in itself, it is not currency.
States will yield their power associated with currency about as willingly as the academic community has yielded to the correctness of GUTCP.
BrLP can charge a fixed amount in USD. That is a peg that would support the USD. It is that simple. If BrLP only accepts USD, then the USD will tend to retain powers associated with a world reserve currency because anybody who wants energy will need to exchange their currency for USD. That may have great advantages for the US, but Triffin’s Dilemma will bite hard. It leads to world war. So, in addition to accepting USD, BrLP could accept payment in all currencies, but then BrLP is in the business of controlling the relative values of all the world’s fiat money, in the big arbitrage game. That much power would be not left unmolested by states. It is better to focus on science and technology.
What happens if, in addition to accepting USD, BrLP accepts a particular Nakamoto cryptocurrency (or perhaps a few of them), possibly at a slight discount to the USD? This would stabilize the value of these cryptocurrencies dramatically. For every transaction conducted in a Nakamoto type of cryptocurrency, the power of politics would be bypassed. Taxes would still be paid, but the exercise of capital through currency would shift to a new form, an apolitical form, free from the hazards of Triffin’s Dilemma. This would not impair the fiat power of any state in particular. It would not reduce state power unpredictably or suddenly. It would be a slow disarmament of all central banks.
BrLP would be able to change policy at any time.

On 9/25/2018 9:51 PM, marinaskevin@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] wrote:

Show message history
Randy Mills

Sep 26

View Source

>>I don¹t see any restriction on hydrinodollars being exchanged for
>>anything as long as it is not contraband.

On 9/25/18, 11:51 PM, “SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com on
behalf of marinaskevin@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics]”
<SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Show message history
Randy Mills

Sep 26

View Source

From: Ed <waldo234@…>
Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 11:14 AM
To: <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

The ideal of a cryptocurrency, as outlined in the quasi-mythical Satoshi Nakamoto’s White Paper is a peer-to-peer cash system without any central authority, but with a strict central force, as found in the blockchain. Ideally, it eliminates the political problems associated with a world reserve currency, while preserving the essential aspects of trustworthiness, fungibility, transferability, etc.
The value of anything is rooted in the belief in it.

>>That seems to be an inherent instability.
Oil is valuable for obvious reasons, so is IP. They have associated values. Cryptocurrency has value because people believe it can work as a form of currency superior to the fiat units that are empowered with the force of the state (you use fiat to pay taxes, i.e. legal tender). USD ultimately has value because of the coercive power of the state, like all fiat currencies. We believe in the power of the state because it is no joke.
Countries have tried to back their currencies with real estate, but it lacks fungibility, transferability and other qualities. Energy as a currency backing works better than real estate, but it is not a good store of value. It can be stored, but not in your wallet. It would need to be represented, so it always comes back to the need for a currency. The ability of hydrino IP to back currency is in its potential wealth, but in itself, it is not currency.
States will yield their power associated with currency about as willingly as the academic community has yielded to the correctness of GUTCP.
BrLP can charge a fixed amount in USD. That is a peg that would support the USD. It is that simple. If BrLP only accepts USD, then the USD will tend to retain powers associated with a world reserve currency because anybody who wants energy will need to exchange their currency for USD. That may have great advantages for the US, but Triffin’s Dilemma will bite hard. It leads to world war. So, in addition to accepting USD, BrLP could accept payment in all currencies, but then BrLP is in the business of controlling the relative values of all the world’s fiat money, in the big arbitrage game. That much power would be not left unmolested by states. It is better to focus on science and technology.

>>BrLP has to have a plan for commercialization on a scale never undertaken by any company.

What happens if, in addition to accepting USD, BrLP accepts a particular Nakamoto cryptocurrency (or perhaps a few of them), possibly at a slight discount to the USD? This would stabilize the value of these cryptocurrencies dramatically. For every transaction conducted in a Nakamoto type of cryptocurrency, the power of politics would be bypassed. Taxes would still be paid, but the exercise of capital through currency would shift to a new form, an apolitical form, free from the hazards of Triffin’s Dilemma. This would not impair the fiat power of any state in particular. It would not reduce state power unpredictably or suddenly. It would be a slow disarmament of all central banks.
BrLP would be able to change policy at any time.

>>Cryptocurrency has no intrinsic value and has no backing. It could go to zero instantly. You eliminate the government, but you eliminate the government backing which has a lot of cash flow and wealth control.

On 9/25/2018 9:51 PM, marinaskevin@… [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] wrote:

Show message history
alexjcombs

Sep 26

View Source

{OK. I came home tonight to a slew of bitcoin posts this evening. I will post all of those that came in today. However, no more will be approved for quite a while! As long as I am moderator! John Farrell, Moderator}
I’d like to respectfully offer up a different point of view regarding the value of bitcoin (little “b” for the token). It is best to think of bitcoin as a digital commodity that permits the token holder to interact with the Bitcoin (Big “B” for the network/ledger) blockchain. The Bitcoin blockchain is a globally shared, immutable, permissionless database. There are a vast array of non-monetary uses for such a shared database. For example, one can run data through a hash function, and anchor the hash function output into the blockchain by making a bitcoin transaction. That hash function output will now be permanently and irrevocably anchored into the Bitcoin blockchain. It may not be immediately obvious, but this ability to write data to a global immutable database offers substantial economic benefit for certain use cases that were not previously possible. Bitcoin, being the most secure and longest running blockchain, is currently preferred for these use cases.

All value is subjective and determined across two dimensions, utility and scarcity. The Bitcoin blockchain currently has significant non-monetary utility in addition to its monetary utility, and this utility is growing over time. Scarcity comes in the form of the credibly fixed supply of bitcoin tokens. Thus, we have a network and associated token which is both useful and scarce. While it is currently best to think of bitcoin as a digital commodity, it may be that over time it evolves into a true money, because it has properties that a good money has: durability, portability, homogeneity, divisibility, recognizability, scarcity, liquidity, etc. I believe the credibly fixed supply to be the most important, as this seems to be the only stable equilibrium in the coming future of ferocious competition between different cryptocurrencies aspiring to be global money. Assuming that backing with tangible physical objects is necessary for value creation is a mistake in an increasingly digital world. The significant non-monetary use cases of bitcoin as a digital commodity for interacting with the Bitcoin blockchain, coupled with the favorable monetary characteristics of the bitcoin token, have caused individual actors to subjectively attach value to bitcoin and are the reason that the “market cap” of the network has grown to north of $100 billion over the last 9 years.

I expect this growth to continue, and believe Bitcoin miners will flock to hydrino technology. Electricity cost is the main determinant of mining profitability. It is hard to know with certainty, but total Bitcoin network energy consumption is estimated to currently be 50+ TWh per year and growing rapidly. Industrial Bitcoin miners may be a great group to approach as the MHD SunCell comes to market; they have an insatiable appetite for cheap power.

I agree with your assessment of the value of BLP’s IP but would like to point out two serious potential issues with the idea of issuing hydrinodollars.

To the extent that BLP has control over the hydrinodollar network, which I believe would be necessary to regulate issuance of hydrinodollars in proportion to hydrino kWh availability, BLP would be required to comply with KYC/AML laws; potentially a huge burden. Failure to comply with these laws yields very stiff penalties. BLP would likely be required to get money transmitter licenses in all 50 states, all of which have different regulatory and capital requirements. The same sorts of compliance issues would apply the world over. The hydrinodollar might initially be a security per the 4 pronged Howey Test, with further regulatory burden. BLP could end up composed largely of compliance personnel. Decentralized cryptocurrencies avoid such problems because there is no single point of failure; there is no office to which men with 3 letter jackets can pay a friendly visit. If BLP went this route, I would expect many visits of this nature.

Second, I see US government help in global IP enforcement to be crucial to the long-term success of BLP. As I mentioned the other day, I think this is the most geopolitically important invention since atomic weapons. Many countries that currently have strong intellectual property laws may decide to rewrite the rulebook as a global race to adopt hydrino technology begins, compelled by economic necessity. It seems to me that BLP will want and need the full might of the US military discouraging this sort of behavior. Attempting to subvert the US dollar as the global reserve currency would not only rouse extreme ire from the US government, to the detriment of BLP’s ability to conduct business, but if successful, would impair the US government’s ability to make sure that BLP’s IP rights are respected.
Randy Mills

Sep 26

View Source

I agree that we should strive to coincide our interests with those of the US government.

Accepting energy payment in dollars would substitute for the vacuum from decline in the petrodollar effect.

The hydrinodollar could be structured as a licensing contract. It could be a convenient way to trade future energy delivery as a form of currency without being a currency or a security. Gold and mineral or oil extraction rights can be bartered for example.

A BrLP mesh network could provide a competing service to the blockchain.

From: <alexjcombs@…>
Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 11:46 AM
To: <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

I’d like to respectfully offer up a different point of view regarding the value of bitcoin (little “b” for the token). It is best to think of bitcoin as a digital commodity that permits the token holder to interact with the Bitcoin (Big “B” for the network/ledger) blockchain. The Bitcoin blockchain is a globally shared, immutable, permissionless database. There are a vast array of non-monetary uses for such a shared database. For example, one can run data through a hash function, and anchor the hash function output into the blockchain by making a bitcoin transaction. That hash function output will now be permanently and irrevocably anchored into the Bitcoin blockchain. It may not be immediately obvious, but this ability to write data to a global immutable database offers substantial economic benefit for certain use cases that were not previously possible. Bitcoin, being the most secure and longest running blockchain, is currently preferred for these use cases.

All value is subjective and determined across two dimensions, utility and scarcity. The Bitcoin blockchain currently has significant non-monetary utility in addition to its monetary utility, and this utility is growing over time. Scarcity comes in the form of the credibly fixed supply of bitcoin tokens. Thus, we have a network and associated token which is both useful and scarce. While it is currently best to think of bitcoin as a digital commodity, it may be that over time it evolves into a true money, because it has properties that a good money has: durability, portability, homogeneity, divisibility, recognizability, scarcity, liquidity, etc. I believe the credibly fixed supply to be the most important, as this seems to be the only stable equilibrium in the coming future of ferocious competition between different cryptocurrencies aspiring to be global money. Assuming that backing with tangible physical objects is necessary for value creation is a mistake in an increasingly digital world. The significant non-monetary use cases of bitcoin as a digital commodity for interacting with the Bitcoin blockchain, coupled with the favorable monetary characteristics of the bitcoin token, have caused individual actors to subjectively attach value to bitcoin and are the reason that the “market cap” of the network has grown to north of $100 billion over the last 9 years.

I expect this growth to continue, and believe Bitcoin miners will flock to hydrino technology. Electricity cost is the main determinant of mining profitability. It is hard to know with certainty, but total Bitcoin network energy consumption is estimated to currently be 50+ TWh per year and growing rapidly. Industrial Bitcoin miners may be a great group to approach as the MHD SunCell comes to market; they have an insatiable appetite for cheap power.

I agree with your assessment of the value of BLP’s IP but would like to point out two serious potential issues with the idea of issuing hydrinodollars.

To the extent that BLP has control over the hydrinodollar network, which I believe would be necessary to regulate issuance of hydrinodollars in proportion to hydrino kWh availability, BLP would be required to comply with KYC/AML laws; potentially a huge burden. Failure to comply with these laws yields very stiff penalties. BLP would likely be required to get money transmitter licenses in all 50 states, all of which have different regulatory and capital requirements. The same sorts of compliance issues would apply the world over.. The hydrinodollar might initially be a security per the 4 pronged Howey Test, with further regulatory burden. BLP could end up composed largely of compliance personnel. Decentralized cryptocurrencies avoid such problems because there is no single point of failure; there is no office to which men with 3 letter jackets can pay a friendly visit. If BLP went this route, I would expect many visits of this nature.

Second, I see US government help in global IP enforcement to be crucial to the long-term success of BLP. As I mentioned the other day, I think this is the most geopolitically important invention since atomic weapons. Many countries that currently have strong intellectual property laws may decide to rewrite the rulebook as a global race to adopt hydrino technology begins, compelled by economic necessity. It seems to me that BLP will want and need the full might of the US military discouraging this sort of behavior. Attempting to subvert the US dollar as the global reserve currency would not only rouse extreme ire from the US government, to the detriment of BLP’s ability to conduct business, but if successful, would impair the US government’s ability to make sure that BLP’s IP rights are respected.
laminin laminin

Sep 26

View Source
Hi All
I recommend this and the links(yes broken clock Krugman is cogent here, otherwise a broken window fool) for some background on Bitcoin, public ledger and their spawn.
Show message history

You are missing the point. Bitcoin does not have any value. Its only utility is that it facilities transactions. There is nothing backing it. Hydrinodollars would be backed by assets, the hydrino technology IP rights, worth potentially hundreds of trillions of real dollars. Hydrinodollars would be worth their face value in hydrino kWhs. That value can be exchanged for goods and services or traded for other currencies. The money supply would be limited by the total value of hydrino technology which in time could be more than all the current total wealth in the world. This scenario is much better than gold or US government back currencies due to the lesser total wealth securing the currencies in the latter cases..

From: <Jimmy.Winn@…>
Date: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 9:26 PM
To: <SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] Re: Hydrino Technology

Some crypto coins are “instamined” meaning that all the coins are created at the genesis of their blockchain. There are advantages and disadvantages to a coin being instamined. One prominent instacoin, Ripple, created 100 billion ripples. When a coin is instamined you have to trust the creator of the coin to have only generated 100 billion ripples. When a block is mined like bitcoin, however, the trust is in the proof of the mathematics and cryptography, which can be independently verified by anyone. Bitcoin will only have ~21 million bitcoins and it can be verified. With Ripple, it cannot be verified. Also, since Ripple is not 100% verifiable they have been known to have a large gap within their blockchain database during the early years in its existence. Even though this discrepancy exists Ripple still has a marketcap of $20 billion because investors don’t care. In addition, coins that are usually instamined have centralized servers or a federation of servers to verify monetary transactions. For example, Ripple uses a network of distributed servers for verification. Control of the network relies on anyone who has the authority to run the server, perhaps with by granting permissions with cryptographic private key(s). Oppositely, a mined coin like bitcoin does not require authority or trust, and anyone with mining hardware can run a validation server. Permission is not required.

Probably the easiest strategy for BrLP is to instamine, for example, 1 billion Hydrinocoins. Distribute these coins proportionally to shareholders. This will bypass Wallstreet completely, and it is a good way to raise money very quickly. Cryptocurrency has been known to have 1000x more liquidity than traditional IPOs. The drawback is that the SEC will probably treat this as a security and BrLP will face regulatory push back. Many cryptocoin IPOs have made a lot of money this way and have gotten away with it, so I don’t really advise this unless you are ready to face legal battles.

If you don’t instamine and mine similarly to bitcoin, you are less likely to face legal repercussions because you never distribute coins directly. The free-to-download opensource software distributes the coins using an algorithm and anyone with the hardware resources can mint new coins. This is the harder approach and no other coin has been able to replicate this strategy as successfully as bitcoin.
nailogmij

Sep 26

View Source

I will not argue whether or not bitcoin has value. The debate on whether or not bitcoin has intrinsic value has been going on for over 8 years. I can only state the facts which is that bitcoin currently has a marketcap of $112B so there are people who have decided to give it added value by buying bitcoins.

In your case I think you think hydrinodollars have value because you think it can function as a form of money and also as a security. It is like money because BrLP will accept hydrinodollars as payment in exchange for power; and it is similar to a security because owning hydrinodollars could be a way to identify shareholders. Lots of things can go wrong if these dollars are not implemented correctly. If hydrinodollars have a $300T marketcap, that means one company would be in control of the backbone of financial transactions. If something awful were to happen to this company, heaven forbid, a govt shutdown, a terrorist attack or a nuclear strike, then $300T worth of marketcap could disappear if the accounts were hosted on centralized servers. Gold, silver, and maybe bitcoin is more protected from such catastrophic events.

There is only so much wealth and wealth generation. If hydrinodollars did reach a 300T marketcap, it would first require a transfer of wealth from fiat, stocks, gold, property, derivatives, etc. into hydrinodollars. People would need to sell fiat, gold, and property for hydrinodollars. BrLP’s tech would also have to generate new wealth. I would think the SunCell is a good candidate for causing the singularity.

—In SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com, <rmills@…> wrote :

You are missing the point. Bitcoin does not have any value. Its only utility is that it facilities transactions. There is nothing backing it. Hydrinodollars would be backed by assets, the hydrino technology IP rights, worth potentially hundreds of trillions of real dollars. Hydrinodollars would be worth their face value in hydrino kWhs. That value can be exchanged for goods and services or traded for other currencies. The money supply would be limited by the total value of hydrino technology which in time could be more than all the current total wealth in the world. This scenario is much better than gold or US government back currencies due to the lesser total wealth securing the currencies in the latter cases..
Show message history

Some crypto coins are “instamined” meaning that all the coins are created at the genesis of their blockchain. There are advantages and disadvantages to a coin being instamined. One prominent instacoin, Ripple, created 100 billion ripples. When a coin is instamined you have to trust the creator of the coin to have only generated 100 billion ripples. When a block is mined like bitcoin, however, the trust is in the proof of the mathematics and cryptography, which can be independently verified by anyone. Bitcoin will only have ~21 million bitcoins and it can be verified. With Ripple, it cannot be verified. Also, since Ripple is not 100% verifiable they have been known to have a large gap within their blockchain database during the early years in its existence. Even though this discrepancy exists Ripple still has a marketcap of $20 billion because investors don’t care. In addition, coins that are usually instamined have centralized servers or a federation of servers to verify monetary transactions. For example, Ripple uses a network of distributed servers for verification. Control of the network relies on anyone who has the authority to run the server, perhaps with by granting permissions with cryptographic private key(s). Oppositely, a mined coin like bitcoin does not require authority or trust, and anyone with mining hardware can run a validation server. Permission is not required.

Probably the easiest strategy for BrLP is to instamine, for example, 1 billion Hydrinocoins. Distribute these coins proportionally to shareholders. This will bypass Wallstreet completely, and it is a good way to raise money very quickly. Cryptocurrency has been known to have 1000x more liquidity than traditional IPOs. The drawback is that the SEC will probably treat this as a security and BrLP will face regulatory push back. Many cryptocoin IPOs have made a lot of money this way and have gotten away with it, so I don’t really advise this unless you are ready to face legal battles.

If you don’t instamine and mine similarly to bitcoin, you are less likely to face legal repercussions because you never distribute coins directly. The free-to-download opensource software distributes the coins using an algorithm and anyone with the hardware resources can mint new coins. This is the harder approach and no other coin has been able to replicate this strategy as successfully as bitcoin.
amack43

Message 54 of 54 , Sep 26

View Source

And, I hope, it’s democratic allies. More than ever we need to strengthen the military, commercial, political and technological alliances between the democracies.
—In SocietyforClassicalPhysics@yahoogroups.com, <rmills@…> wrote :

I agree that we should strive to coincide our interests with those of the US government.
snipped

1 thought on “HydrinoDollars…. I CANNOT BELEIVE WHAT I AM READING! (Randy Mills, Hydrino Technology & Society for Classical Physics)”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s