The case for Millsian physics

This is written so that laymen will understand.

Instead of dealing with advanced physics, I will focus on what is really important – the proof that this theory, the scientific basis for Brilliant Light Power, is a realistic and precise model of reality.

1. Reality Test

The most important criterion of the relevance and validity of a scientific theory is how correctly it is able to describe reality.

Let us see how well Millsian Physics performs in this respect.

a. Prediction of a molecular property

It is not important that you understand the property. What is important is that it has been measured with high precision by different universities, yielding the same results for each molecule. (The property is called the total molecular bond energy and is different for different molecules. )

The mathematical models of Millsian Physics enable prediction of this property with great precision.

Below you will find a comparison between the theoretically predicted size of the total molecular bond energy using the formulas of Millsian theory and the measured size.

This comparison is a decisive validity test for Millsian theory as a whole, because, for this calculation, formulas representing the very core of the theory are used, not just fringe elements of limited influence (R.Mills, personal communication). Therefore, the extent to which the predictions are correct determines the validity of the theory as a whole.

Below you find a diagram that represents the predictions of Millsian Physics in 800 cases compared with the measured values published by independent universities:BLP predictions Mills only w lines

The vertical axis indicates the value predicted by Millsian Theory and the horizontal indicates the correct (measured) value. The line going from bottom left corner to the upper right corner shows where the predicted and measured value should meet when the prediction is correct – let us call it the perfect match line.

The meeting point between the predicted and measured value is marked with a red dot.

So when the predicted value is 150, and the measured value is the same as, in the example above, the dotted yellow line (predicted value) and the blue line (measured value) meet at the perfect match line, shown as a red dot on it.  The perfect match line is actually green but a large part looks red because it is covered with red dots. This means that the predicted and measured value match very closely in all examined cases.

The prediction error was 0,1% at an average.

Commonly scientific theories have larger levels of prediction error, and still, they are accepted as viable models of reality. This is because, in advanced natural science, the subject matter is so complex that scientists often have to accept somewhat inaccurate models. The performance of Millsian Physics in this respect is extraordinary.

Solid empirical basis

The mathematical formulas underlying all the above predictions are derived from formulas of Classical Physics that have a solid empirical basis (Electrodynamics, Classical mechanics).  They constitute an integral part of the very core of Millsian Theory. This contributes to the strength of Millsian theory.


The correctness of the predictions of the Total Molecular Bond value in every one of a large number of cases as well as of the molecular structure of complex molecules is sufficient to confirm that Millsian Physics is a valid and precise model of reality.

A crucial point here is that the formulas used for the predictions are an integral part of the very core of Millsian Theory

Therefore, the correctness of these predictions confirms the theory as a whole.

2. Comparison with Quantum Mechanics

In the evaluation of a new theory, claiming to be a more “true” model of reality than the prevailing understanding, it is customary to compare with the theory presently considered the most successful. In this field, Quantum Mechanics (QM) is the contender.

Comparison of the prediction of Total Molecular Bond Energy

Let us again have a look at this prediction by Millsian Physics and compare with the prediction of exactly the same values by Quantum Mechanics. See the diagram below (click on it to enlarge)::

BLP predictions Mills vs QM origThe superiority of Millsian Physics is obvious. In contrast, only a few predictions by QM of the Total Molecular Bond Energy are correct, and many are far off the mark, several of them “catastrophically”, a term used in physics when the predicted value is impossible (zero when the real value is far higher).

This is a completely objective comparison. The measurement values have been established with high precision by independent researchers and the predictions follow automatically from the mathematical formulas of either theory and leave no room for any tweaking.

The low precision in the prediction of Total Molecular Bond values indicates important flaws in Quantum Mechanical Theory in contrast to the remarkable exactness of Millsian physics.

Precise prediction of molecular structure

Regarding molecular structure, Quantum Mechanics has only been able to describe the simplest molecule, hydrogen (H2) and has not been able to correctly describe any more complex molecule. This illustrates the incompleteness of QM.

Millsian Physics, on the other hand, has no problem in describing even very complex molecules, see “Molecular Physics” and offers commercial service for this purpose (see To characterize complex molecules, using quantum physics, a combination with classical mechanics is required. The Nobel Prize in Chemistry of 2013 was awarded for the development of this achievement. This proves that the method of Randall Mills, for describing molecules is Nobel Price-worthy.

Differently from the Nobel Prize-winning method, it does not need quantum physics. Using only classical mechanics it represents a simpler and more elegant solution for describing molecules. Below is an example of the precise match between the molecular structure as predicted by Millsian theory and an image of the molecule:

BLP physical image vs predicted shape

Lambda shift prediction

The successful prediction by Quantum Mechanical Theory of the Lambda shift indicates that, in some special contexts, the QM theory may touch reality but its conspicuous failure in other cases indicates the presence of important flaws, while the fact that Millsian Physics performs consistently with high precision indicates that it has no major flaws.

Cosmological predictions

Differently from Quantum Theory, Millsian physics has successfully developed a mathematically consistent and coherent model that covers all orders of magnitude in the Universe from the smallest nuclear particles to galaxies. Thereby it was the first one to predict the eternal expansion of the Universe.

An important achievement is that it is able to integrate gravity into the model. This has been an unsolved enigma in Quantum Theory, see footnote “Covering all orders of magnitude”.


These comparisons should be enough for settling the issue which theory is a more realistic model of reality.

Critics are off the mark

Some physicists have criticized and rejected Millsian physics with the argument that it violates fundamental principles of Quantum Mechanics. This argument indicates that they don’t understand the issue or have not studied the matter properly.

Millsian Physics is a complete theory meant to replace Quantum Mechanics, establishing different laws and principles.

Therefore it is wrong to argue that Millsian Physics is unacceptable because it is incompatible with Quantum Mechanics. This is exactly what it has to be for justifying its claim to be a different theory. For more details, see “Critics are off the mark” and “Doubts?“.

“It would be irrational not to be very skeptical, and I was extremely skeptical. However, after having reviewed Dr. Mills classical theory, participated in experimental designs and execution, and having reviewed vast amounts of other data BLP produced, I have found nothing that warrants rejection of their extraordinary claims”

Dr W. Henry Weinberg, who was a professor of Chemical Engineering, Chemistry and Applied Physics at California Institute of Technology for eighteen years, and professor of Chemical Engineering, Chemistry and Materials Science at University of California, Santa Barbara.

General Conclusion

Millsian Physics satisfies the major criterion of validity for a scientific theory – predictive power – to a remarkable extent.  The precision and consistency of correct predictions as presented here are considerably superior to Quantum Mechanics which indicates that Millsian Physics is a more corect model of physical reality.

For more about Millsian Physics, go to “The Theory


Covering all orders of magnitude

[Millsian physics covers] Collective Phenomena (CP) such as the basis of the statistical thermodynamic relationships and superconductivity, the basic forces and structure of matter on the nuclear scale and the cosmological ramifications of CP such as the identity of absolute space that unifies all frames of reference, solves the nature of the gravitational and inertial masses and their equivalence, gives the derivation of Newton’s second law, and solves the origin of gravity, the families and masses of fundamental particles, and large-scale features and dynamics of the universe including the prediction of the current acceleration of the cosmic expansion and the absence of time dilation in red-shifted quasars. The central enigmas of quantum mechanics mainly regarding the wave-particle duality are also resolved classically.


%d bloggers like this: