Brilliant Light Power, Inc. Announces the Validation of the Generation of over a Million of Watts of Power in the Volume of a Coffee Cup from the Conversion of Water Fuel to a New Form of Hydrogen (Press Release)

The following press release was published by Brilliant Light Power:

CRANBURY, N.J.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Brilliant Light Power, Inc. (BrLP) announced today that it has continuously generated over a million watts of power from a new primary source until the cell vaporized from the intense heat. The power released by the conversion of hydrogen atoms from water molecules into a lower energy form called “Hydrino” or dark matter is manifest as brilliant-light emitting plasma wherein the light is uniquely and extraordinarily essentially all high-energy light in the extreme ultraviolet. Using four cross-confirming methodologies, five validators have confirmed over a million watts of plasma power developed by BrLP’s so-called SunCell® at power gains of over 100 times the power to ignite the Hydrino reaction, and at power densities higher than any previously known energy source. Dr. Randy Booker, physics professor and former Physics Department Chairman at University of North Carolina-Ashville said, “The power was measured using two optical power measurements involving three sophisticated spectrometers calibrated against a National Institute of Science and Technology traceable standard and two thermal methods involving a commercial calorimeter and the rate of the rise of the water coolant temperature of the SunCell®. All four methodologies cross-confirmed the production of megawatt scale power that was continuous in the case of the SunCell® with spectacular commercial potential. Moreover, the unique and characteristic spectrum from the optical tests of essentially purely high energy light emission over a predicted range confirms the hydrino reaction as the source of the power.”

BrLP subsequently held an invitation demonstration event on June 28, 2016 for about 50 guests from industry and academia wherein BrLP presented live demonstrations of the enormous power density and power gain by multiple methods. BrLP also presented an engineered SunCell®prototype having no moving parts that it believes is capable of producing 125 kW of electricity. BrLP anticipates having field trials in 2017 supported by several current engineering firm and manufacturer partners. It comprises refractory materials capable of the intense heat wherein the SunCell’s® enormous power density heats a blackbody radiator to incandescent temperatures to produce the effect of thousands of halogen light bulbs, and the light is converted to electricity with so-called concentrator photovoltaic cells that receive the light from the blackbody radiator and operate at incident light intensities of over one thousand times that of sunlight. Details of the SunCell®, the BlackLight Process, the video and slide presentation from the June 28, 2016 demonstrations, background theory, journal publications, and other support materials are available on the BrLP webpage (

BrLP’s safe, non-polluting power-producing system catalytically converts the hydrogen of the H2O-based solid fuel into a non-polluting product, Hydrino, by allowing the electrons to fall to smaller radii around the nucleus. The energy release is over 200 times that of burning the equivalent amount of hydrogen with oxygen. Due to this extraordinary energy release, H2O may serve as the source of hydrogen fuel to form Hydrinos and oxygen. Moreover, the SunCell® is compact, light-weight and autonomous with a projected capital cost of 1% to 10% that of any other form of power. The anticipated cost is so low that BrLP intends to provide autonomous individual power for essentially all stationary and motive applications untethered to the grid or any fuels infrastructure. Dr. Mills announced, “This is the end of the age of fire, the internal combustion engine, and centralized power and fuels.”

“The commercial potential for SunCell® technology is enormous. The promise of a cheap, clean and unlimited source of electric power is on the verge of commercialization. SunCell® components are based on well-known technologies from electrical lighting, photovoltaic, semiconductor, refractory and aerospace industries, and use widely available materials. What is new is Brilliant Light Power’s theoretical and experimental breakthroughs, protected by patents and proprietary know-how. Albert Einstein is looking down, smiling: I told you so, He does not play dice,” said Former World Bank manager Gerhard Pohl. Dr. Joseph Renick, former Chief Scientist at Applied Research Associates added, “It is understandable why even the best of scientists have difficulty taking seriously that which has been accomplished by Dr. Mills and his team at Brilliant Light Power because of how completely it transforms our understanding of atomic and molecular structure, dispels all of the strangeness associated with quantum theory so cherished by quantum physicists and chemists and then to boot delivers to mankind a new source of essentially unlimited inexpensive clean energy. The novel techniques, materials and processes developed by BrLP in the last few years are making this new source of energy a reality for all of mankind. The rest, however painful it will be for many in the natural sciences, will follow.”

One of the validators, Bucknell Professor Dr. Peter Mark Jansson PE remarked, “An objective review of the progress BrLP has made over the past decade in the development of their proprietary hydrogen-based technology indicates that they have achieved an understanding of the fundamental parameters that must be controlled to create a sustainable and energetic reaction of their atomic hydrogen fuel and catalysts. They have made landmark progress in creating demonstration devices that prove the concept of their generation technology with promise of becoming continuously operating prototypes in the near future. The creation of these consistently replicable experiments where input power is multiplied by 65 to 150 times is a remarkable achievement. The input power for these respective experiments was 8.02 kW and 10.45 kW with corresponding output power peaks reaching as high as 521 kW and 1.56 MW. Although these energy bursts were on the order of 1 to 3 minutes in duration I was able to observe a more continuous, sustainable reaction experiment that lasted over 7 minutes, other validators were able to observe operating SunCells® for over 30 minutes in duration.” Dr. K.V. Ramanujachary, Rowan University Meritorious Professor of Chemistry and Material Science, added that from his independent tests he finds, “the developments truly impressive and extremely important. I believe that the technology is amenable for making large-scale devices as easily as a portable one. This is what makes it very attractive.”

Regarding the versatility of power and unsurpassed logistical advantages, David Bennett, former Proterra CEO and former President of Eaton Vehicle Group, Asia Pacific said, “Transportation technology has relied on burning something – oil, coal, natural gas, for over a century. The transition to alternative energy is often considered a niche, futuristic, and even inconsequential solution. The SunCell® presents the possibilities to make this transition to a new energy era a reality.” He further emphasized, “The SunCell® is a relatively simple system that catalytically converts water-based fuel directly into brilliant light that is converted to electricity using existing photovoltaic technology. Initial testing indicates mega-watt power potential, which would radically transform energy technology. The SunCell® presents a solution to the clean energy challenge of our lifetime.”

About Brilliant Light Power

Brilliant Light Power, Inc. is the inventor of a new primary energy source applicable to essentially all power applications such as thermal, electrical, automotive, trucking, rail, marine, aviation, aerospace, and defense. The BlackLight Process, the power source, is the process of releasing the latent energy of the hydrogen atom by forming Hydrinos. The SunCell® cell was invented by Dr. Mills to release this energy directly as electricity from water as the only source of fuel.


BlackLight Process: A novel chemical process invented by Dr. Mills causing the latent energy stored in the hydrogen atom to be released as a new primary energy source.

Hydrino: Hydrinos are a new form of hydrogen theoretically predicted by Dr. Mills and produced and characterized by BrLP. Hydrinos are produced during the BlackLight Process as energy is released from the hydrogen atom as the electron transitions to a lower-energy state resulting in a smaller radius hydrogen atom. The identity of the dark matter of the universe as Hydrinos is supported by BlackLight’s spectroscopic and analytical results as well as astrophysical observations.

SunCell®: The SunCell® comprises six fundamental low-maintenance commercially available systems, some having no moving parts and capable of operating for a decade or more: (i) a start-up inductively coupled heater to first melt silver; (ii) a gas injector to inject hydrogen derived from water and an injection system comprising an electromagnetic pump to inject molten silver and a very stable solid source of oxygen that reacts with the hydrogen to form the hydrogen to Hydrino catalyst; (iii) an ignition system to produce a low-voltage, high current flow across a pair of electrodes into which the molten metal and fuel are injected to form a brilliant light-emitting plasma; (iv) a blackbody radiator heated to incandescent temperature by the plasma; (v) a light to electricity converter comprising so-called concentrator photovoltaic cells that receive light from the blackbody radiator and operate at light intensity of over one thousand Suns; and (vi) a fuel recovery and a thermal management system that causes the molten metal to return to the injection system following ignition.

Photovoltaic or Solar Cell: Each cell comprises a flat panel of a semiconductor material that exhibits the photovoltaic effect, a method of generating electrical power by converting radiation such as solar radiation into direct current electricity. Light absorption in the semiconductor material creates energized charge carriers of opposite polarity that are collected at corresponding negative and positive electrode contacts on opposite sides of the flat panel to create a voltage that can deliver power to an external load.


Brilliant Light Power, Inc.
Lynn Kline, Assistant for Dr. Randell L. Mills
Phone: 609-490-1090 Ext. 125
[email protected]

  • Samec

    Few Joules discharged within some nanoseconds may get “Million Watt”.

    So BLP talking is heavy smoke screen.

    • Ged

      Exactly how terawatt lasers work.

      • Zephir

        The millions of watts are apparently generated at the videos provided by BLP – but how large portion actually comes from the input current?

        • Mark Underwood

          Approximately one in a hundred, apparently.
          The wattage averaged over the entire period of the plasma explosion is 125 kW I believe. So that millions of watts refers to peak power in a narrow band within that explosion time.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Would that formula work out to 1.25kw / 1 millisecond = 1.25 watts per second?
            And if you do that once a second for an hour you get 1.25 watt hours?

            And the input would be lets see: 1.25 kwh / 100 or 1250 watt hours?

            Did I get that correct?

          • Mark Underwood

            Watts is already a rate of energy delivery, namely Joules per second. So watts per second doesn’t apply here.

            If the average output power is 125kW, the average input power will be roughly 125kW/100 = 1.25kW. A bit under what a normal household fuse would blow at. So lots of power goes in, but 100 times more goes out. But because of losses I would guess that a practical device will output ‘just’ 20 times (both power and energy) what goes in. I sense that I am rambling incoherently, my apologies.

          • Thanks – a very clear summary. So IF it is assumed that these figures are broadly correct, the problems are (a) the incredibly low efficiency of the conversion of UV energy to electricity, and the consequent need to remove the larger part of it (in excess of 80%) as heat, and (b) the near impossibility of finding materials that will last for more than a few tens of minutes under the conditions created within the ‘suncell’. Fouling of the system by oxide deposits is also likely to be a major problem.

          • Mark Underwood

            For sure, you’ve hit the two major problems on the head, and raised a possible problem with the third. I’ve heard that the oxide they use (as a source of oxygen to form the water catalyst) is extremely stable even in high temperates. The downside is that it may somehow foul the system. Who knows at this stage except Mills. He’s experimented with various oxides with a great range of outcome.

            I know he has been consulting with at least one university and company about developing PV cells that are designed to harvest UV rather than visible light. But lately he seems to be backing off that plan. This is probably because silver vapor ends up blocking much of the UV.

            Here’s hoping BrLP can overcome and get a product out.

          • If the hydrino theory can be verified and fully understood, or if some other theory turns out to be the explanation of the supposed excess energy, then It’ll just be down to engineering – principally identification of other means of expressing the effect that are more amenable to development.

            Water powered reciprocating engines that depend on electrical discharges to dissociate water have been claimed for years of course (and apparently routinely suppressed) so perhaps Mills is on his way to a similar, controllable technology for producing torque. In the short term at least, this would be far more efficient than trying to generate electricity.

          • Mark Underwood

            I remember it well: just before the Suncell was conceived, but after Mills discovered he could use water as a hydrino catalyst, he was analyzing the nature of the plasma explosion when he sent low voltage, high current electricity through a hydrate. He had planned to capture the energy of the charged plasma explosion via magnetohydrodynamics. But he soon discovered that there was relatively little energy in the moving plasma; most of the energy was radiant energy. So he decided to go the photovoltaic route. Hence his current path. But who knows, perhaps doing it differently could result in less light and more explosive force to provide torque.

          • LCD

            Mark but on average I think the output is no higher than the input, right?

          • Mark Underwood

            I certainly hope and expect the average output it significantly higher than the input!
            If it isn’t, well then the device doesn’t work as claimed. Or am I misunderstanding you?

          • LCD

            The bursts are high COP but is it high COP on avg. I’m asking I haven’t read.

          • Mark Underwood

            COP by definition uses the ratio of total energy out and total energy in. The averaged (over time) ratio of power out and power in would be the same as the COP ratio. And that is supposed to be about 100 to 1 before losses (which would be considerable losses).

          • LCD

            Okay so you are saying that the net energy gain happens over the entire time it is on and not just in the “bursts”. This is ask I’m trying to clarify.

            Think ssm vs non ssm I.e. Rossi

          • Mark Underwood

            On a micro second time scale I would suppose the following progression:

            1) A burst of low voltage, high current is applied between the electrodes. No explosion yet, so COP is probably close to zero.
            2) Explosion of plasma occurs with hydrino formation and photon release. COP is probably in the hundreds.
            3) The explosion subsides ; the current draw into the electrodes vanishes as the conductive mercury is dispersed. COP is somewhere between that of 1) and 2) .

            Stage 1) is by far the shortest in time. 2) and 3) may be of comparable lengths. I’m guessing here.

      • Mark Underwood

        Lots of experiments have been done by Mills to characterize hydrino, some of them published and available for viewing on the website. For instance Mills reports that the process of hydrino formation yields continuum radiation into the extreme ultra violet or into the X-ray, depending on the type of hydrino formed. So, Mills will say that the cosmic background extreme UV and X-ray radiation is coming at least in part from hydrino (dark matter) formation. Cosmologists would say that such radiation is coming in large part from high temperature gases released long ago from supernova, and now filling very large regions of space.

        • Fedir Mykhaylov

          You can set a child’s question: Where does the hydrino after the reaction? Hydrino seems to be the most stable state of hydrogen?

          • Ged

            If it was the most stable, hydrogen would naturally arrive at that state. It would also change the spectral lines of the hydrogen. I don’t see evidence for either in any science experiments or cosmology. The hydrino hypothesis makes no empirical sense.

            It also would not release much energy. When an electron falls from one orbital shell to another, the difference in quantum energy is given off as an electromagnetic wavelength (the converse is true). So, if the formation of the hydrino is giving off visible light to very soft UV, then the max energy per atom is around 4 eV (visible light runs from 1.6 to 3.1 eV, and UV is 3.1 to 124 eV), which is the chemical maximum extractable energy.

            Now, 1 kJ/mol = 0.010364 eV per atom. So, that means there would be at most 385.95 kJ of available energy from 22.4 liters (one mole) of hydrogen at STP if that energy was from hydrino formation.

            Consider that just combusting 22.4 liters of hydrogen would release 241.8 kJ (if water product is in gas from). They seem to claim quite a bit more energy release than that, saying 20x more than combustion (!), suggesting more than hydrogen by itself is involved (not hydrinos). Now consider they are splitting water to get their hydrogen, the reverse of combustion, which then takes 285.8 kJ/mol since water is in the liquid state, and really at best hydrinos should give just 100.2 kJ/mol of energy. A very far cry from what they say they get (no melting of tungsten electrodes with that).

            And, there is another problem. Moving between shells is a quantum matter, as I mentioned, so the light given off should be one wavelength with only a small bit of spread. This is how the flame test works when identifying elements; the light from hydrino formation should be all -one color- (spectral line, with possible weak harmonics).

            Whatever BLP is doing, I don’t seem any evidence yet that it involves a hitherto unheard of hydrino state for hydrogen, though they claim spectroscopic and cosmologic evidence. The lack of hydrinos in any other observation throughout all of science despite them supposedly being lower energy (thus spontaneous!), the lack of spectral line emission, and the energy release mismatch, all seem to disprove the idea. Maybe there is some evidence I have missed though.

          • Mark Underwood

            Mills has been documenting the properties of hydrino, and even hydrino hydride compounds, for something like twenty years. If you enjoy reading (which I don’t) much of it is there on the website and in the huge book Mills has compiled, also freely available online.

            Hydrino formation, like (say) LENR, is not spontaneous. Special conditions like the presence of an appropriate catalyst must be met in order to get to a lower energy state. Heck even burning normal gas to arrive a lower energy state (CO2 and H2O) is not spontaneous. You need a spark to get it going.

            The spectrum thing would deserve an entire thread but this is already too long.

          • Ged

            You bring up a good issue though. A catalyst or a spark is needed to overcome the energy of activation, but is unrelated to if a reaction is spontaneous (releases energy) or not (absorbs energy). If hydrinos were a lower energy state for hydrogen, which releases energy upon formation and is thus spontaneous, then we definitely would see them in other contexts where the energy of activation is met, say during combustion, or surely the aftermath of fusion. In fact, if hydrino is lower state than what we consider ground, then any time hydrogen is ionized so that it is stripped of it’s electron, and then is allowed to recapture an electron, that electron should immediately go to the hydrino state, being that it is the lowest and no energy of activation barrier exists since no current orbit exists for that electron.

            Hmm, I dunno, I just don’t see it yet, unless there is some very special exotic condition existing where hydrinos are a transient state, rather than end product.

            The energy release is still way too big for an orbital shell reconfiguration of this quanta (even worst since the energy to split water must be subtracted). And it would all be giving off one color of light (plus weak harmonics) yet what we see is a general blast of EM energy across the spectra. It looks far more like cold fusion than hydrinos.

          • Ted-Z

            Hydrino might actually be a new state of matter and the concept that the dark matter are just hydrinos makes a lot of sense. However, in the reactions of BLP, the mechanism is likely different than a hydrino.
            There are some indications (although “fringe”), that the electrons might take some “hidden positions” in atoms. The “fringe” evidence is the Ormus concept, where some transformed noble metals we apparently not emitting or absorbing any spectral peaks (I think that the tests were Atomic Absorption and Inductively Coupled Plasma attempts to see the spectra). According to Mr. Hudson, it took about 5 min. in the carbon electric arc to see some spectral emissions from his samples. While Mr. Hudson’s numerous claims are indeed “very fringe”, nevertheless the instrumental spectroscopy evidence might be correct. There are some other sources indicating the existence of the “altered states” of metals, particularly nickel, cobalt, silver and gold.

          • Ted-Z

            Assuming easy transitions between the “dark matter state” and the regular matter is just that: assuming… and it might be quite incorrect.

          • Ged

            That would be very interesting. Could well be that Dr. Mills and BLP have been rubbing up against some other phenomenon where hydrinos do exist, but trying to over-apply the ideas outside those special bounds such as to the SunCell (reconfigured orbital shells aren’t going to generate enough energy to be a thousand times brighter than the sun on their own).

            That’s the hard yet exciting part of new discoveries–it takes time and a lot of work to nail down their actual definitions and where they fit in what is known.

          • Ted-Z

            The dark matter would deserve a thread of its own… the problem is that we know close to nothing about the dark matter. Even worse, it seems that we do not even have any scientific tools to investigate the dark matter, even if somebody would give us a 1 kg sample. If the electrons in the dark matter are so close to the nucleus, than such a material would easily disperse and perhaps even pass through any container, metal or glass. The behaviour of the “dark matter atoms” would resemble the behaviour of a neutron: bouncing from other atoms and easily penetrating even such materials as lead.
            I am aware of two US patents “implying” (not openly) conversion of dispersed “dark matter gold” from sea water into regular gold. The process apparently required several days boiling in a concentrated alkaline solution. So the transitions, if any, are extremely difficult.

          • Fedir Mykhaylov

            If the state in the form hydrino metastable after energy release should be observed a sharp cooling of the reactor space. Such an a song of ice and fire.

          • Mark Underwood

            The hydrino is very stable, and there is a large exothermic reaction in its formation. I wouldn’t say there is cooling afterwards but rather just energy dissipation until the next detonation.

          • Fedir Mykhaylov

            If stable hydrino would like to observe its properties in the reaction chamber after the formation, is possible to observe the emergence of a variety of compounds. Unless introduction the chemical compound at least in the of metal compounds hydrino

          • Axil Axil

            Electrons do strange things in condensed matter, take cooper pairs as an example, then there is fractional quantum hall effect.

            Maybe hydrinos exist during the LENR reaction. Maybe LENR causes hydrinos and not the other way around.

          • Ged

            If they do, like some sort of compressed hydrogen different from even that in gas giants like Jupiter, then they probably are a transition state intermediate, as they wouldn’t get close to releasing the amount of energy BLP reports on their own, while LENR does.

          • Mark Underwood

            Mills said the reaction had little energy released in the form of an explosive pressure wave, compared to the released photonic energy. That is why he went the route of collecting energy via photovoltaic cells rather than magnetohydrodynamics. If he said there wasn’t much heat (I don’t recall that), it might have been in the context that most of the radiant energy was in the UV. Now of course with the sliver he is converting that UV to blackbody, and hence very much to heat. Which is a bit of a bummer.

          • LCD

            It does not seem likely that it is an electron as we know it moving from one orbital to another.

            But the transition seems real at face value.

            Fractional charges or lower energy state of an electron. Something is transitioning and causing the spectral lines

          • Axil Axil

            There are things called artificial atoms that live inside nanocavities. Some store electrons and some store light. Transitions don’t need to happen beween atomic orbits.

            if you are interested


          • Ged

            I haven’t seen the spectral line evidence specific to hydrinos if there is some and the reaction looks broad spectrum to me, but lines also put a bound on the possible eV/atom energy. The energy can’t be coming from an electron moving to a new shell, that would not be a thousand suns or 20x combustion. There is something else going on. Maybe hydrinos can be made to exist, but as they are currently described they are not the source of the SunCell’s energy, and we have yet to see them anywhere else.

          • DrD

            But if they are what he seems to claim (not that I’m convinced) then you can’t see them but they make up 27% of the mass of the universe. They have no electromagnetic interaction. There gravitational effect is how they are detected or should I say postulated. I assume (if the theory’s correct) that the transition is what creates the Photons after which — no more photons.

          • Ged

            Yeeeaaahh, about that.

            The proton nucleus will still scatter and interact with light (or electron beams, or proton beams, or neutron beams, etc…) of sufficiently small wavelengths, regardless of whatever the electron is electronically doing. Also bad for that idea, a hydrogen has a -nuclear- spin of 1/2, meaning it has a magnetically alignable spin with a simple procession, which is used to physically see hydrogen by methods like NMR. The hydrino does nothing to the nucleus, so the magnetic, scatteting, and kinetic properties inherent to a proton (just like with ionized hydrogen) will still exist for a hydrino. It cannot be dark matter. Dark matter has no kinetic interaction with matter (no electron, proton, neutron, or any other particle scatterings or interactions) and no interaction with any wavelength of ligjt; but a proton still has physical mass that interacts in direct (elastic) collisions in all those ways let alone strong and weak nuclear forces still in play since it is still baryonic matter.

            Bringing the electron closer to the proton does nothing to change that all that–it doesn’t stop being baryonic matter made up of quarks and gluons from which its properties are derived. Even a neutron has baryonic physical and nuclear properties that are readily detectable, and the hydrino isn’t even as electronically neutral as a neutron.

            There is no way a hydrino is dark matter, as dark matter is not baryonic, and there is no way the electron moving down to some below ground shell is releasing enough energy to be 20x that of combustion, and certainly not given the wavelengths of light involved. The fact one wavelength alone is not being given off, but a broad band along with heat, disproved the idea. Hydrinos could maybe be a thing in some transition state for fusion, but they aren’t the full source of what BLP claims to see nor the source of dark matter.

          • Mark Underwood

            I don’t see how you can say with surety that dark matter has no kinetic interaction with matter. I’ve seen studies that looked at any non gravitational drag on dark matter after galactic collisions, and it is no easy matter to come to definite conclusions. It is still a subject of much investigation. One study that had to do with dwarf galaxies postulated that the particular type of dark matter therein was probably a hard to detect type of molecular hydrogen. So things are not so cut and dried.

            I also don’t understand why you are saying there is no way the electron moving down from the ground state could be releasing 20 times the energy of combustion. Given that there is indeed stable, low energy states below the ground state with binding energies of 13.6 * p^2 eV where p is an integer greater than one, why not?

          • Ged

            Because the light given off is no more than 4 eV in the spectral range. I already calculated that all above. It would have to give off Hard UV to soft X-rays to meet the energy requirement. Not what we see. All evidence points to hydrinos not being majorly involved or not being a thing.

            There are endless ideas on dark matter, but any idea must fit all the facts. For the masses involved, hydrogen would cause enormous light scattering over millions of light years. This does not happen for dark matter. More over, we -can- see clouds of molecular hydrogen in space, this has never been an issue. Hydrogen’s physical properties come from its two up quarks and one down quark, not the shell configuration of its electron.

            Also, we can detect protons of any state, and even detect neutrinos, but we have never -kinetically- detected dark matter. If we can see neutrinos but not dark matter, when neutron is barely kinetically interact with matter, then dark matter is even weaker or no interaction at all. So far, only gravimetric interactions have ever been seen.

            I’m sorry, but there is zero evidence hydrinos are dark matter, and every evidence to the contrary. It takes just one contrary piece of evidence to disprove part or all of a theory.

          • Mark Underwood

            I remain puzzled. How can you say that the light is not more than 4eV. They *are* measuring soft X-rays. Check out

            About detecting hydrogen molecules in space. Sure we can detect warm H2 in space. But this is not the case with cold H2, which remains essentially transparent.

          • Ged

            If hydrinos are the source of the energy we see, then all the energy release would need to be in X-ray form, and converted from that. Is that was is occurring?

            Essentially is not the same as actually, and it still interacts and reacts with all normal visible matter (CO for instance in that link), as well as scatters light at sufficient densities, obscuring stars behind such clouds (known as interstellar reddening or extinction if there’s enough). However, hydrogen clouds, however cold, also give off 21 cm radio waves due to the magnetic spins of the atomic nucleus (proton) and electron of the hydrogen . A hydrino does not change the nature of the proton itself and its magnetic properties, nor the fundamental spin of the electron, so all such theories have to take that into account. The link you gave was about directly looking at what is going on with the interstellar H2 by spectroscopy, which is required still if one wants to deeply study an atom or molecule and what it’s doing (which tells you more about its environment). Hydrogen’s radio waves may tell us it’s there, but doesn’t tell us much about what it’s doing or how its structuring in the gas clouds, and that’s what people want to study.

          • Mark Underwood

            First, not all the energy is released in soft x-ray. Again, it is continuum radiation, with a certain soft x-ray cutoff frequency for the formation of the H(1/4) hydrino. In other words there are a continuum of frequencies released below that maximum soft x-ray frequency. Secondly, yes the originally emitted light, including the soft x-ray is converted in the Suncell. It is absorbed and thermalized by the silver vapour which then gives off the corresponding blackbody spectrum for the temperature which is about 5500C if I recall, not sure about that.

            About the 21 cm line. Just to be clear, that line characterizes only the neutral hydrogen atom. It does not apply to the neutral molecular H2, which does not emit that line.

            As a matter of interest, Mills many years ago has calculated the hyperfine structure transition energies of various types of hydrino, and proceeded to match them with previously unmatched signatures found by the COBE satellite. But I don’t know very much else about that.

          • Ged

            Well if it is a continuum, that is a problem. An electron shell transition is descrete, it is where the quantum of quantum mechanics comes from. If it is actually as claimed in theory so far described, the hydrino formation should release only a very narrow spectral line of x-rays (all one ” color”). If that is not the case, then the hydrino is not the major event going on here. In fact, all the data agrees with what we know of LENR fusion (broad spectrum from IR heat to x-rays), not electron shell transitions (spectral line of one narrow frequency band). It’s a fundamental problem you nor any of the commentors so far have addressed.

            Also, you are completely right that molecular hydrogen, H2, does not emit radiowaves. However, H2 does directly absorb UV which causes its breakdown, and so is fully detectable by UV absorption lines. H2 also has quadrupole transitions as the magnetic spins of the two protons interact, which also allows direct detection. And then it interacts with normal matter like CO and ionized particle streams, and that interaction also gives off emissions we can easily see.

          • Mark Underwood

            You’re saying that, given the experimental results of continuum radiation with a soft x-ray cutoff, it can’t be the result of an electron dropping to a lower energy shell, because such would have given off a single spectral line. Of course, that is just standard quantum theory talking. But the whole point is that Mills has an alternative, classical theory that predicts and describes what can happen with an atom, some of it naturally differing from what QM would ‘predict’.

            Here is a post I wrote yesterday to someone to describe in a nutshell Mill’s idea of what is going on in the energy producing reaction:

            You could say that Mills can’t be right, but the data appears to back him up and apparently has no QM explanation.

            You said, “In fact, all the data agrees with what we know of LENR fusion (broad spectrum from IR heat to x-rays)”

            Surely you exaggerate? LENR in the ecat can get hot enough to glow, but it isn’t nearly as hot as the Suncell temperatures. And this says nothing of the specific spectrum of the hydrino reaction before it is converted to blackbody. Does any LENR experiment match this spectrum? I expect the answer is no. For instance I haven’t heard that LENR is characterized by soft x-rays emmission with a sharp cutoff as is the case with the H(1/4) hydrino formation reaction.

            About H2, sure if a cloud of H2 is directly in front of and close to a strong UV source we’ll see absorption lines. But I doubt if we have that luxury with most cold H2. So we have to find it indirectly as it interacts with carbon monoxide. The H2 quadrupole transitions are much weaker than the dipole transition of H, and I doubt we could see the signal coming from deep space. But apparently we can see the signal in the atmospheres of cold dense H2 gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn.

            My point is that, if cold H2 gas is difficult to detect in outer space, then how much moreso with the postulated hydrinos. On the flip side, although hydrinos themselves are dark, the energy signature given off by their formation – continuum radiation with cutoffs in the extreme UV and x-ray – is detectable. And of course space is characterized by an anomalous excess of that very thing, so I’ve heard.

          • Ged

            If it turns out true that the theories Mills is studying turn out as a valid alternative to QM, then indeed it could drastically change our understanding of how shells work and thus the energy they can give off. If course, such theory must explain all of QM and associated phenomena.

            So, it is valid to say that this could all work out under a different theoretical framework, and you are right that under that competing idea the evidence is more supportive rather than contradictory towards hydrinos. But I don’t think the evidence for Mills’ framework is there yet, or sufficient to change the context of reasoning away from QM. Of course, that day could come, but not yet for me.

            And yes, LENR gives off up to soft x-rays as has been reported by several groups including Rossi and MFMP. It is expected from potential bremsstrahlung radiation from the fusion directly, and based on the generation of thermal neutrons which can subsequently give off soft x-rays with a cut off upon their decay (14 minute half life). Both pathways should scale with intensity of reaction, so a very intense reaction like the SunCell should be expected to give off proportionally more detectable x-rays if not shielded, along with the rest of the broad spectrum EM from LENR fusion.

          • Mark Underwood

            What is rather humorous is that LENR people tend to either disbelieve Mill’s results, or else attribute them to LENR ; meanwhile hydrino people tend to disbelieve LENR results or else attribute it hydrino reactions. Me, I believe that both types of reactions can occur.

            About the energy spectrum that LENR gives off, I’ve found that subject to be confusing. On one hand some people are trying to explain why there is no high energy photons given off, while others explaining why there is. So clearly results are varying.

            About energy given off from beta decay, I would think there should be gamma given off, and then some bremsstrahlung radiation (including soft x-ray) was well.

            Here’s to a very interesting next few years.
            Cheers and thanks for the conversation

          • Roland

            Hi Ged,

            One of the posters on this forum, Job001, has expertise in spectroscopy, his comment is that Randal Mills has radically advanced the state of the art to such an extent that Mills is deserving of a Nobel for this work alone even if everything else he has done and written is incorrect.

            The spectroscopy data is clear, the photons given off in the hydrogen to hydrino reaction are at 10.1nm with an energy of 124eV.

            Mills repeatedly states that the video evidence is not reflective of the actual energies released which are in the ultra UV range; what is captured by the cameras is secondary radiation from the interaction of the 10.1nm radiation with oxygen and silver vapour and the walls of the apparatus and represents a minor percentage of the energies seen in the spectroscopy data.

            While I continue to have substantial reservations about the robustness of the engineering intended to contain and ‘harvest’ these energies the instrumentation is very clear about what is occurring.

            The math derived energy densities Mills gives (1megW in a coffee cup if continuous operation at a high ignition frequency is actually achieved) are no more extraordinary than the math implied energy densities of a litre of concentrated Quarks at 4.244megW.

            Please do consider that many of your reservations arise from conjectures that can be easily resolved by rigorous due diligence.

          • Ged

            Thank you for the info. I’m basing the data on what we see of the reactor in action and its performance, but if it is giving off X-rays during the orbital shell reconfiguration, as you say there, and that is what is being harnessed and turned into energy, that would give a lot more support to the proposed mechanisms.

            There are still some other major challenges though, but such things can be answered in time.

          • Roland

            You’re welcome. The actual mechanisms employed have been structurally inadequate at every stage of development since Mills discovered the method of inducing the transformation with high current and low voltage.

            Every time an advance in energy density has occurred the stressors on the apparatus have increased and, as I’ve noted from time to time, it’s almost as if Mills, and his engineering staff, have failed to take their own calculations of the potential energy release fully into account when designing the hardware.

            Now the reaction is generating 5,000C temperatures in a confined space and, not to surprisingly, various parts of the apparatus are melting in fairly short order.

            P.S. Please do take a look at Mills’s software for the prediction of the bonding structures in the creation of unique molecules; that he is apparently successfully predicting both structure and emergent properties in advance of the molecules being realized based on his GUT-CP lends further weight to his argument. I’d be very interested in your opinion.

          • LCD

            The spectral line discussion of hydrinos is worth the watch. The correlation to dark matter is not trivial either. Might be wrong but interesting

          • Ged

            Always a chance it’s completely correct! Just gotta get the work done to see if it can be squared away with what is already observed, and use it to plan what new experiments should be run to see if its predictions can be further observed.

          • Fedir Mykhaylov

            Your remark about the melting tungsten electrodes explainable heat release in the recombination of atomic hydrogen on the surface

          • DrD

            Mills theory is that the Hydrino is dark matter which makes up most of the universe. Therefore you can’t see it. Well that’s the theory (I think!).

          • Roland

            Because hydrinos are non reactive chemically, and lighter than air, once released from confinement they rise into the upper atmosphere where they eventually encounter solar radiation energetic to revert them to regular hydrogen.

          • radvar

            Yep. per BLP

            Page 22 here:


            “Non-polluting: by-product is harmless lower energy state of hydrogen called Hydrino®, lighter than air, vents to space”

    • LCD

      Well let’s be fair, yes bursts of peak power is not average power which would be a true test of COP.

      However the underlying reason for the bursts is scientifically very interesting and useful.

      Is it Dark Matter??… Ummm it’s a data point that requires lots of other supporting evidence. It’s not clear from the article why a hydrino would be dark matter, to me anyways.

  • Anon2012_2014

    Where is the Technical Validation Report on this experiment on the BLP website?

    I looked and found various reports unrelated to this experiment. Feel free to link a technical validation report to THIS experiment here. Not a link to BLP’s entire website, just the report.

    The above press release talks about first vaporizing silver, mixing with hydrogen, and then exposing to an “oxygen source”, and finally sparking it like a spark plug. The press release mentions a 100x power gain.

    Well, I know of a different system that does this where hydrocarbons are vaporized, mixed with oxygen, and then exposed to a spark source, but with 1000x power gain. It’s the gasoline engine.

    So in the absence of a technical report showing exactly the entire experimental setup and the entire experimental results, we have nothing of substance.

    In the interim Randall Mills, MD, still drives around in a Porsche Cayenne while taking tens of millions of dollars of investor money. His demonstrations are closed to select “investors” who will not ask embarrassing questions or challenge the setup.

    I would like to believe that BLP has a new energy production device. But with headlines like Megawatts PEAK energy and nothing for this experiment showing evidence of joules in vs out released to the public, and closed “demos” that are more like laser light shows at the plantarium, it is just more hand waiving like the Wizard of Oz. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain indeed.

    • LCD

      Umm except that there is no plume of smoke, that would be pretty obvious dude. Come on. Be skeptical but reasonable.

      • Anon2012_2014

        @LCD: “Umm except that there is no plume of smoke, that would be pretty obvious dude.”

        “Umm Dude”, hydrogen + oxygen combustion burns with NO plume of smoke — just clear water vapor unless it condenses in the cold.

        • LCD

          Sorry if I sounded like a jerk, that was not my intention but I get it, in text everybody ascribes the worst tone they can think of.

          Your point is that it could be some hidden source, fine, but gasoline was just not a good example.

          Oxygen and hydrogen is but that’s not what you led with.

          • Anon2012_2014

            Gasoline burns clear without smoke to CO2 and H2O if there is sufficient oxidizer and time to prevent incomplete combustion.

            A good technical report will show exactly the amounts of ingredients and heat energy supplied to the reaction; and to a high degree of accuracy the heat, light, or other energy produced from the reaction.

            I also admire Mill’s modeling, but it is just a model/theory that has not been proven or disproven yet. At one point both the Theory of Aether was predominant before Special Relativity.

          • LCD

            I think practically speaking we can exclude gasoline.

          • Anon2012_2014

            I was using the gasoline spark plug engine only as an _example+ of something chemical with a high COP (spark gap to power output).

            Unrelated, gasoline is a good comparison for joules/cc and joules/gram. Beat gasoline in a given volume when we can’t measure the insides (like Rossi) gives us confidence it is unlikely to be chemical.

    • Mark Underwood

      “But with headlines like Megawatts PEAK energy and nothing for this experiment showing evidence of joules in vs out released to the public…”

      BrLP certainly did talk about joules in and out. For instance the bomb colorimetry data from around the 127 minute mark showed it had a COP of 3. And that included the energy required to melt a shot of silver. If the silver was already heated, as it would be in an operating SunCell, the COP would have been 35. Considering that the volume of the bomb calorimeter was not optimal for maximizing the reaction, the bomb calorimetry COP is in the same order of magnitude as the spectroscopic methods used for determining energy out.

      “Where is the Technical Validation Report on this experiment on the BLP website?”

      There was more than one experiment at the demo. I haven’t looked for the validation reports, but when they show up I would suppose they will based not on the demonstration day experiments but other experiments conducted either before or after the public demo.

      “In the interim Randall Mills, MD, still drives around in a Porsche Cayenne while taking tens of millions of dollars of investor money. His “demonstrations” are closed except to select “investors” who will not ask embarrassing questions or challenge the setup.”

      Bordering on ad hominem, implying Mills is bilking money for personal gain out of gullible investors. Really.

      • Anon2012_2014

        @Mark Underwood: Where is the BLP technical validation report on THIS experiment (1 MW peak, COP 1000) showing joules etc… Something written, technical, describing the experimental setup and the measurements to prove the hypothesis that is works and is not conventional chemical or electrical heating.

        • Mark Underwood

          I haven’t heard that such reports are available in full yet, only very summary aspects of the experiments. I’ve seen third party validation reports but they are at least two years old and are on the BrLP website. And even they aren’t very technical. Also, they predate the SunCell. Even so they indicate that excess energy is not from conventional chemistry.

          When the technical validation reports come out from the most recent methods of generating power I’m sure someone will report.

          PS The recently 1MW power peak is only that, a peak. Averaged out over time the power output is about ten times less, on the order of 100kW. And the COP before losses is only 100, not 1000.

          • Anon2012_2014


            Even if COP is only 10x and average is only 10 kW, IF PROVEN, this would be a very economically useful device.

            What makes BLP, Rossi, or the other competitors extraordinary is this performance without using conventional energy sources.

            For me to believe in BLP, I need the whole truth written in a detailed and convincing technical report. Not more powerpoint marketing materials. Not a press release. And not a demo to a selected audience.

            And we wait…

  • Thomas Baccei

    Dr. Randy Booker
    Dr. Joseph Renick
    Professor Dr. Peter Mark Jansson
    Dr. K.V. Ramanujachary
    David Bennett, former Proterra CEO

    A quick google search indicates that these “observers” seem to be genuine and adequately trained to offer some credibility to this report. If their names are being used without their knowledge or consent, I hope they will find a way to publicly deny their involvement. Now, I suppose it is possible that they have been “conned” by an elaborate hoax. I also suppose it is possible that they have all decided to become part of the con themselves.

    So, this might be legit with competent reporting witnesses;
    or – They might have have been duped.
    or – They might have all become scam artist themselves.

    All of this explosion of contempt regarding Randal Mills seems a bit shrill and off the charts to me. You should calm down DrD and Anon. I think door number three above (part of the scam) is highly likely. I think that Door number two has some chance to be correct, but it would be just another appeal to cynicism which denies their competence.

    Of course “nothing is proven”. But, the Randal Mills saga has entered a new phase, and the public revelations are more and more specific and vetted. This is now beginning to look quite a bit like the real deal and no amount of hand flapping can make that go away.

    • DrD

      I simply pointed out the obvious “error” in the presentations.
      Apart from that I was impressed long ago.
      Don’t forget it has to remain vertical (under about 1G) due to those “non moving” parts that return under gravity, which is my only real concern but that’s only an issue for mobile apps.

    • Mats002

      Ha ha Thomas! Welcome to ‘the game’, we are quite a few people making the same calculations for five years or so.

      What’s your question again?

  • Gerard McEk

    As I said before talking about COP in relation to power is noncense and should not be done. The only question is: how much ENERGY goes in and how much ENERGY comes out. Nevertheless things seem improving for BrLP and maybe one day they come out with a COP we can trust. First a new influx of money is needed to bring the next (off so many) prototype designs into life. It will be interesting so see who will win this race Andrea Rossi or Randell Mills……

    • DrD

      Once it is self sustaining as he implied and fuel is almost zero cost, then the COP becomes a bit irrelevant. Of course that assumes there’s significant power left over after it’s consumed its own requirement and the amortization remains reasonable.

      • Gerard McEk

        True, as long as the COP>1

        • DrD

          Indeed, in fact I’d say significantly >1.

  • Ted-Z

    A system that runs about 7 minutes at the maximum. Assuming that this is correct, it is still far behind a one year test. The technical scale-up may be close to impossible due to damage to the electrodes under the extreme conditions. The new photocells are interesting, assuming they were invented by the BLP. Still, the photocells would have to absorb/pass/partly reflect? about 1.5 MW of total energy per square meter, as the sun provides us with about 1.5 kW per square meter and they are claiming the energy stream of 1000x over the power of the sun. Durability beyond 7 minutes is a question.

    • DrD

      He said they’re multi (3 band) and are not by BLP and they are commercially available types (probably customised). He explained that they hope to include an IR reflector, probably Gold, to “recycle” some of the 60% energy that’s not converted to electric. They buy them in. It was explained in the previous demo.

    • Gerard McEk

      A lot of energy will also be released as heat. It would be interesting to know what percentage. If it would be like te QuarkX (50% max), then the best method of energy conversion would probably still be the Carnot cycle. The PV route BrLP takes to directly generate electricity is dubious, untill we/they know more about these details.

      • DrD

        He estimated 60% heat (not electric) compared to Andreas 90% (not electric).
        He also said the economics favours just throwing away the 60% rather than trying to use it via other cycles to produce extra electric. It’s cheaper and more sensible to just double up as it gives increased redundancy aswell.

        • Gerard McEk

          When near to an endless and cheap energy resource comes into the picture, we should not economics let rule the energy market, to avoid overheating of the world due to a doubling series like behaviour of the energy increase. I know it will take a while but that scenario is not unlikely in the long future. I would tax the energy waste.

          • DrD

            I agree but unfortunately the fuel isn’t the determining cost any more. Mills said that the dominating cost comes from the Solar cells which they have to buy in. Which is where amortization comes in. He also said it will attract taxes. Andrea will have similar issues.

    • LCD

      The extreme ultra violet is readily absorbed by many things including water. So theoretically boiling water might still be best.

      It is possible that Rossi and BLP are experiencing different degrees of the same effect.

      The quark x blue light for example is intriguing at this point.

      • Yes, simple is best when the ‘core’ engineering is already difficult.

      • Ted-Z

        The blue light might be an indication of the formation of meta-stable isotopes (neutrons or protons outside of the nucleus, but still connected with the nucleus). The meta-stable to stable transition creates blue light, UV or X-rays.

        • LCD

          Do you have a link that might explain this?


    • Mark Underwood

      Yes it only runs a short time before meltdown. Avoiding meltdown will be the primary problem I think. They are exploring refractory materials to better resist the massive amounts of heat involved. They have a long way to go before they have a device that can run for hours. But if their progress to date over the last two years is any indication, they will arrive at a very respectable working device within a few years I hope.

  • Axil Axil

    July 13, 2016 at 8:47 AM
    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    What do you think of the theory of hydrinos ?
    Warm Regards,

    Andrea Rossi
    July 13, 2016 at 9:04 AM
    The existence of hydrinos has got not evidence at all. Quantum theory, by the way, bars the possibility of their existence.
    Warm Regards,

    • Mark Underwood

      It’s fitting that Rossi doesn’t believe in hydrinos, since Mills doesn’t believe in LENR. It’s rather humorous if you think about it!

      • Zephir

        Actually it is, because both phenomena violate the existing theories in equal way. But regarding hydrinos I”m with A. Rossi. First of all, I don’t understand how hydrino could generate the energy and to remain unnoticed in nature, being the most stable form of hydrogen in this way. The most stable form of matter is simply the ash of every reaction and it should occur everywhere… We have lotta iron and nickel in the universe, because these elements
        are product of many exothermic nuclear reactions – but no hydrino
        meteorites are still raining on our heads. Which is strange.

        IMO the fundamental quantum state is the most stable form of matter instead due to omnipresent vacuum fluctuations, which keep everything in motion. Once the electron revolving the hydrogen atom slows down bellow the fundamental quantum state, it should get kicked of its position again. If some subquantum states could exist by some miracle (Mills is saying, the spherical orbitals radiate poorly the energy, so that they’re especially prone to forbidden electron transitions), then they must be very unstable and as such endothermic: their formation would consume energy instead of generate it. They would be interesting from theoretical perspective – but practical?

        If I should take Mill’s experiments seriously, I’m forced to consider some fusion mechanism behind it instead of hydrino.

        • Mark Underwood

          The ash of the hydrino reaction *is* everywhere, and is called dark matter, the most abundant form of hydrogen in the universe. So, for instance, even the sun would be mostly hydrino I presume. Hydrinos would be able to undergo nuclear fusion just like regular hydrogen.

          It is important to realize that the ‘ground state’ was merely defined as what we commonly understood it to be, and the mathematics was worked out around that accordingly. By very definition from the start it couldn’t include fractional orbits.

          Mill’s findings and theory are much more radical that Rossi’s, because they strike at the heart of quantum theory, Schrodinger’s equation and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty principle.

          • Zephir

            /* The ash of the hydrino reaction *is* everywhere, and is called dark matter */

            After then the hydrino is not the most energetic product of reactions, the dark matter is. The fractional orbits can indeed exist, but they should be metastable. The same fluctuations which are keeping all particles in motion and which prohibit the fall of electrons into atom nuclei would also prohibit the formation of hydrinos.

          • Mark Underwood

            I think something is being misunderstood. Hydrino is the low energy, very stable product. When I say hydrino reaction I really mean hydrino-producing reaction. Normal hydrogen is converted to a lower energy state, called hydrino. Also, hydrino can can be converted to lower energy hydrino. All types of hydrino would be considered dark matter.

          • Job001

            Second the misunderstood notion. Ground state hydrogen just means hydrogen doesn’t spontaneously drop into a lower state by quanta emission unaided. In Mills theory a lower orbital can be created using a catalyst or by using a chemical acceptor of the correct quanta.

            Since the correct high energy quanta is rare and about 10 times more energetic than visible light, the result is dark matter. If a hydrino gets bumped up into ground state hydrogen, then it is just hydrogen indistinguishable from the bulk of the universe, thus unsurprising.

            It is also funny folks think we can bottle up hydrinos! They are so small no container can contain them, they will leak out fast.

          • Mark Underwood

            It’s all a bit confusing. Hydrino formation can result in a combination of two things: thermal energy (fast moving atoms or molecules) and continuum radiation with wavelength cutoff and peak intensity anywhere from ultra violet wavelength to gamma ray wavelength, depending on the particular type of hydrino being generated.

            There, that should confuse anyone even more. 🙂

            Hydrinos cannot be bumped up in the conventional sense. Instead what would happen is this : A hydrino gets hit by a photon which is energetic enough to knock the electron clear out of the atom. (The hydrino gets ionized by a very high energy photon.) Then the free proton and free electron recombine to form normal hydrogen.

            So hydrinos are not oblivious to light, it’s just that they aren’t made excitable by light like normal atoms and molecules.

            I should remind myself that Mills *conjectures* that hydrinos comprise the so called dark matter of the universe. So given that hydrinos are proven to exist, it is another matter to prove that they are in fact the cosmological dark matter.

          • GreenWin

            Dark matter is a cosmological invention to make inflation equations work. If we somehow decide we live in a steady state “breathing” universe – expansion & contraction (oscillating ) the need for invisible magic matter is eliminated.

          • Carl Wilson

            I went there and found nothing that was other than “BrLP says …”, I asked specifically for some one, any one, other than BrLP, so why did you send me there? Did I miss something?

          • US_Citizen71

            It is nothing compared to the energy from the Sun.

            510.1 trillion m² (surface area of the Earth) x 1kW/m² / 2 = 255.05 trillion kW of solar energy applied to the earth continuously.

          • Mark Underwood

            great post, appreciate it!

          • LCD

            I don’t think he is a crackpot at all and it’s sad that that is what main stream science thinks.

            I appreciate your post as well. Great post.

          • Mark Underwood

            Mills does believe the universe expands and contracts. But he believes in dark matter. Dark matter was called upon to solve the problem of how galaxies could rotate the way they do without flying apart. So it has nothing to do with inflation. Maybe you are thinking about dark energy?
            A few cosmologists do away with dark matter by changing how gravity works on different scales. Modified Newtonian Mechanics. Not sure if it is gaining in popularity lately or not.

          • Zephir

            Providing that the vacuum is behaving like the stormy sea, you cannot
            get more quiet state than the rest of vacuum without exertion of
            excessive energy for its cooling. Actually the less than absolute zero
            temperatures were already achieved, but they were metastable and
            required huge energy from outside for their preservation.


        • Anon2012_2014

          I don’t care if it is Hydrinos or LENR. I just want to see hard third party evidence of high power and excess energy COP that is not conventional chemical or nuclear. If BLP or Rossi has it, that would be great. The theory or models can catch up with the observed excess energy at a later date — indeed once the energy production is proven empirically at economic levels, there will be a race to model and then validate the physics.

        • LCD

          I hear you. Maybe a new particle. Or maybe a lower every level for an electron?

          Did you hear his reference to dark matter?

          • Axil Axil

            Maybe LENR?

    • LilyLover

      As one of the biggest fan of AR, this is ONE point that I plainly attribute to the required professional jealousy.
      He refrains from saying that quantum theory as it “stands” today, is wrong.
      I bar the quantum theory’s incompetence from being able to transform a promise of an elephant into an elephant let alone the said elephant, excluding the white or it’s relative in pink monocorn.

      • LCD

        Quantum theory is not wrong. It is proven. The problem is it might be incomplete. And when it comes to the macroscopic outit has issues partly because it’s hard to compute even with machines.

      • Fedir Mykhaylov

        Not pink elephant the virtual.

  • Tom59

    The list of experts verifying the results and endorsing them openly looks impressive. Is this proof that they have something?

    • Carl Wilson

      Proof? No. Reason to take seriously? Perhaps. But I’d take them a good bit more seriously if the “verifying .. and endorsing” were not only of BrLP’s claims but also of others working on closely related approaches.

  • radvar

    Simplistically speaking, nukes work by squeezing uranium, and surprise! It goes boom!

    So I’m not shocked at the idea that you could squeeze matter and have extra energy appear “from nowhere”.

    Nonetheless, the paragraph on “conservation of energy” at the bottom of this page
    left me with a “non-compute”.

    I’m not particularly interested in the gizmo aspect of it (i.e. levers and pulleys). If there’s energy available, people are pretty clever about putting it to work.

    Does anyone have a simplified explanation of how the basic BLP energy release is supposed to occur? (Is this an interesting topic for anyone else)?

    • Chemical energy is released when electrons fall into lower energy orbitals around their atom’s nucleus, in the form of light (photons).
      Mills claims that he has discovered a lower energy than known before state of electron orbital in hydrogen; a hydrogen atom having an electron in this super low energy state he calls a hydrino (get it?, little hydrogen).

      BrLP’s supposed process is causing, they say, normal hydrogen to be converted into hydrinos and releasing copious amounts of energy as a result. They have validations and verifications of both the theory and the technology, of varying credibility.

      Here are the 2 big problems:

      1 – They have been on the verge of commercialization for decades by their own words. Nothing ever really happens (so far).

      2 – The hydrino theory is summarily rejected by mainstream scientists and is believed inconsistent with well proven quantum physical ‘laws.’

      So they have a ‘you’re crazy’ problem just like LENR and on top of that a serious ‘cry wolf’ problem an order of magnitude bigger than Rossi’s (but Rossi is catching up).

      • Carl Wilson

        “So they have a ‘you’re crazy’ problem just like LENR”
        I suggest there’s a 3rd big problem. LENR has a lot of “validations and verifications …. of varying credibility” by a lot of different investigators.
        I would start taking BrLP’s claims more seriously if you could tell me who else is doing something similar — even if their results were questionable.

        • One key point for me in evaluating Rossi and his E-Cats has been the claims of others to be developing similar devices. Brillouin, Clean Planet, Lenuco, Nanortech and Nichenergy all make related claims.

          So if Rossi has nothing, that would imply that he’s inspired a cottage industry of scientists who claim LENR+ but who also have nothing… which just seems so unlikely to me.

          Lots and lots of smoke. Is there a new fire?

          • Carl Wilson

            “One key point for me in evaluating Rossi and his E-Cats has been the claims of others to be developing similar devices.” So does not the absence of that in BrLP’s case count as evidence against their claims?
            I count Brillouin out. Too much theory. Same as Mills and his hydrinos.

          • Perhaps not evidence against but a lack of supporting circumstantial evidence in the case of BrLP.

            Regarding Brillouin they have also given video lab tours, demos, gotten outside investors, signed agreements with international companies, made Capitol Hill appearances, had McKubre validate, etc. It would be another very complex and ambitious scam… part of that elite cottage industry, I guess.

          • Carl Wilson

            My guess is that Brillouin is not a scam and that they made a certain degree of progress (I trust McKubre) but are trapped in a dead end due to their reliance on a defective theory.

          • That’s close to my best guess as well.

            But Godes was talking about COP of 100 at one point in some not-too-trafficked places on the web. Which doesn’t fit that scenario, so… I don’t really know.

            I would like to know whatever happened to their supposed agreement with a Korean company.

          • Mark Underwood

            Yes. Thanks! That’s the second time I’ve done that now! Now corrected to silver.

          • emen7

            NP. I like reading your commentaries and descriptions. Thanks.

        • LCD

          LENR has the problem that it is researched privately. Private research is not shared because there is no incentive.

          If public research were done they would have to start from something public and repeatable.

          Nothing like that exists.

          Maybe this could be it?

      • LCD

        Yes the wavefunction that Mills purposes among other things is not square integrable (if mem serves) and simply cannot predict the other excited states of hydrogen.

        But he shows quite convincingly through other scientists that yes indeed there is an unknown high energy transition of hydrogen to what seems like a lower state. (This is what people don’t believe even though they see the transition lines)

        If I understand the transition from ground to that lower state is equivalent to UV light energy.

        Okay so now besides all that we seem to have new empirical repeatable (but maybe not scalable or well controlled) evidence of new physics. The mainstream SHOULD investigate this.

    • doug marker

      As I understand the actual SunCell process …

      1st he uses silver as a ‘catalyst’. It is inductively heated in a small ‘well’ at the
      bottom of the SunCell.

      The molten silver is mixed with water (not sure of its state or how this happens – Mills says that molten silver and water freely mix). Then using an electrostatic pump, a jet of tiny blobs of the silver/water mixture is squirted up vertically and precisely between two heavy duty electrodes.

      The electrodes and silver droplets trigger a ‘short-circuit’ that triggers a very very short burst of high electric current (from a capacitor bank) that vaporizes the mixture. This step is the process that allows a H atom to convert to a hydrino (in which the electron orbital drops to this new lower level (IIRC 1/3 of ground state but this needs checking).

      When the electron drops to the new lower level below ground-state, a narrow spectrum of intense light energy is released.

      The silver doesn’t change other than to become vaporized and then reforms into liquid silver which cycles back down to the heating well to be used again.
      No silver is consumed in the process. It is just a ‘catalyst’.

      The consumable is water. During the firing cycle, the water mixed with the silver is broken down into Oxygen and monatomic hydrogen. This sparking process releases oxygen, plus creates hydrinos out of the monatomic Hydrogen and outputs intense light in a narrow spectrum. The light includes significant heat which is ‘dumped’ by a cooling unit that cools the chamber. The light is captured by special triple layered photo voltaic cells.

      Mills asserts that the heat is not worth salvaging when there is so much useable light energy to be harnessed.

      The hydrinos (according to Mills theory) operate at this new lower than ground state at an energy level that prevents photons from subsequently being absorbed as that would ‘normally’ allow an electron orbital to expand.
      Mills theory is that Hydrinos can not absorb photons. So it is this inability to absorb photon light that makes Hydrinos essentially invisible as they can no longer release further photons as light (done usually when approaching ground state) or absorb photons if the hydrinos are agitated (heated) thus they are essentially invisible. >>The transition from monatomic Hydrogen to Hydrino is thus a one-way conversion<<.

      The amount of Hydrogen available on Earth, to convert into Hydrinos is essentially limitless as far as mankind's energy needs exist.

      Mills believes the spectrum signature he observes when hydrinos are created, fits with what is observed (or not seen) of dark matter.

      Doug Marker

      • radvar

        Thanks Doug, that’s what I was looking for.

        In an over-simplification, in order to make it more intuitive for myself…

        The normal state of the electron in a hydrogen atom is like an inflated balloon, which has a certain amount of energy due to the pressure of inflation. In this case the energy is “whatever” keeps the electron in the shell from falling into the nucleus of the hydrogen atom.

        The “whatever” is essentially hand-waved as postulates and math in QM:

        Mills’ theories say that QM is only an accurate approximation that does not provide enough functional detail to get at that “whatever” energy.

        In the BLP process, after the hydrogen is split the from oxygen in water (or as part of that electrolysis), the “catalytic function” involving the silver causes the electron shell of the hydrogen to suddenly collapse.

        So the catalytic function is like a pin popping a balloon. A relatively small amount of energy applied in just the right way; can’t just lay the pin on the balloon, can’t touch it too lightly. The energy is there in the “whatever”, it just needs to be released. Not unlike squeezing U238. Pop!

        The pop gives off the light, the energy of which is captured in various ways.

        The electron falls into a very low state near the proton, creating the hydrino.

        The hydrino doesn’t interact with anything because it needs an electron in a higher energy state to do that.

        So the hydrinos are really just a waste product.

        Curious as to what might happen to the hydrinos, however, if they are sufficiently inert, and don’t mass much, perhaps they don’t do anything more than gum up the mechanism over time.

        Until the year 2217, when the total mass of artificially formed hydrinos exceeds the critical carrying capacity of the earth’s core, and… 🙂

        • cashmemorz

          Where does the hydrino atom go or does it reconvert to hydrogen somewhere, is what I would want to know before extensive use of suncells that convert hydrogen atoms into hydrino atoms. Until this is known to a high degree of certainty then a scenario worse than the current problem of green house effect might be down the road, as you say “when the total mass of artificially formed hydrinos exceeds the critical carrying capacity of the earth’s core, and..” Whatever actually does happen with the hydrinos maybe negligible, if they all go into the halo surrounding our galaxy. But if they have preferential vector opposite to that of outer space which might be towards the center of the Earth then the Earth may heat up as you say after much of the surface water of the earth is depleted by use of suncells. It may not be a detectible problem for hundreds of years but why tempt fate by trading one problem for a worse one.

          • radvar

            Ah, perhaps I should have put the 🙂 in bold.

            It’s interesting though that we think in terms of environmental consequences so naturally…

          • cashmemorz

            Innate human concern for environment. Its about the future generations if I don’t see the consequences of the mistakes we make. That is why it is best to bring these things up just in case. If I’m wrong about this scenario, all the better, but should check it out to be sure. Or I’m just a worry wort, in which case just ignore me.

          • radvar

            Good impulse

        • doug marker

          Popping the ballon (electron orbital) is a way to view it. Perhaps if you view it as a ball inside the ballon where the ball is the hydrino electron and the other space in the ballon is the photon energy the bursts out.

          Doug Marker
          (the issue of uncertainty principal assesment of an electron is a whole story in itself (I like Mills view:) )

  • Anon2012_2014

    @Wolf: “Dr Mills was long rich before he started BLP. ”

    And you know that how? Why exactly is he raising money? Your claim is identical to Trump claiming he is so rich he can self finance but then (incongruously with his claim), he needs to go out and raise money. The optics are bad here (raising money in a Porsche Cayenne) — but put your money into Mills if you want.

    I am waiting for a technical report on THIS experiment that can be replicated by anyone. BLP can publish the technical report and still protect itself with patents.

  • Brokeeper

    A new energy kid is on the block? If so, it is potentially much more competitive:

    Osmosis energy

    According to this article, if 1000 square meter sheets of this relatively cheap compound called molybdenum disulfide were placed in parallel between salt water and fresh water channels within a cubic meter, theoretically could generate 1GWs of electricity.

    • If this one pans out it will displace all conventional systems for centralised power generation (including nuclear) almost overnight. Almost any place where a freshwater river meets the sea would become a viable location for such plants.

      ‘Suncells’ and ‘QuarkX’ will be left to fight it out for self-powered transport and remotely located power applications. Strange that so many novel energy sources seem to be popping up at once.

    • Mark Underwood

      Interesting! I wish the square metre metric was somehow translated to cubic meters, because it give a better idea of the amount of water that must be moved. From wiki, reverse osmosis of salt water requires about 3 kilowatt hours of energy per cubic meter. Based on this, one would expect that the reverse of this process, namely generating energy from osmosis, would generate something on the order of 3 kilowatt hours of energy from 1 cubic meter of salt water. Is that comparable to the claim of theoretically getting 1MW from one square meter of molybdenum disulphide membrane surface? I have no idea…

    • Private Citizen

      Appears current is measured in nanoampres link

      (see:Figure 2. (a) Current-voltage characteristic of a 20 nm MoS 2 )

      Please correct this if wrong.

      • Per pore in the membrane, not the overall o/p.

      • Brokeeper

        The trick is to create evenly one nano size holes throughout the sheet. I’m thinking laser drilled holes.

  • Dr. Mike

    It at least appears that BLP is improving the system engineering of their SunCell. The original proposed system was to have a light intensity of ~50,000 suns directly converted to electricity using “conventional solar cells”. They now recognize the need for a black body radiator and photovoltaic cells that are designed specifically for use in concentrated light (very expensive cells relative to conventional solar cells). The SunCell still requires a lot of materials engineering to be able to operate continuously at power levels of 1MW or greater. Also, BLP seems to emphasize a really small footprint for the SunCell, but the proposed size does not include the cooling system that will be necessary to remove some 80-90% of the generated energy as waste heat. (A question also remains as to how much of the generated electricity will be needed to run this cooling system.)
    My guess is that BLP is still several years away from having a reliable working prototype that can eventually commercialized. If they can get a reliable system working within 3 years there is a good chance their initial system will produce more energy than has ever been produced in any “hot fusion” device.

  • Observer

    Now in an 8 oz container:

  • Roland

    Exactly, the problem is that we’re trapping an increasing percentage of the incoming solar energy by changing the gas balances of the atmosphere; the actual heat civilization releases into the system is trivial by comparison to both the incoming radiation and the trapped portion thereof.

    In short the inefficiencies of LENR and BrilliantLight systems, in the form of waste heat, are of no import to the global climate.

  • Zephir

    /* . Dark matter as the lowest enegy state of matter which only interacts with normal matter via gravity */

    Many experiments indicate, that the dark matter can annihilate with cosmic dust or microwave, which wouldn’t support the idea of “lowest energy state” , as such a matter should be fully inert, after then. In addition, there are another phenomenological objections against idea, that the dark matter is actually formed with hydrinos, because the dark matter particles seem to be very lightweight in general. Whereas the hydrino must be heavier than proton by its definition.The hydrino could explain only mild portion of so-called warm dark matter, not this cold or hot one.

    • Ted-Z

      I am very puzzled why there are no agglomerations of dark matter, such as dark matter “suns”?
      Is it repelling itself beyond a certain density?

      • Mark Underwood

        Some cosmologists would say that there are (or were) dark matter suns.

      • Zephir

        Yes, this could be another phenomenological objection against hydrino theory of dark matter, because the hydrino shouldn’t less prone to agglomeration than normal hydrogen.

        In my theory the dark matter is representing the “missing antimatter” in the universe and it’s gravitationally repulsive for itself, yet attracted to normal matter up to certain degree. This is because the dark matter particles are actually scalar waves, i.e. magnetic turbulences of vacuum, which exhibit excess of longitudinal waves over these transverse ones (virtual photons), so that they behave like sparse bubbles of vacuum of negative space-time curvature. Which are mutually repulsive indeed like all bubbles.

        Note that the dark matter is not attracted to normal matter by itself, but to negative gradient of space-time curvature around it, therefore it concentrates at the perimeter of massive bodies above their surface, not at their center. Therefore the rotational curves of stars violate Kepler law at perimeter of galaxies, not at their centers.

  • Job001

    Silly rabbit, hydrinos are very small(because the electron orbit is much less than normal hydrogen).

    Consequently, they leak out fast right through all containers. All that remains is the left over oxygen which won’t build up either since it must be purged or reacted(as with silver) so it doesn’t become a gas phase contaminant.

  • Job001

    Look again, the new demo version used tiny drops of liquid silver, no gears.

  • Mark Underwood

    Again the story is quite complicated. Mills originally added water. But starting very recently he is no longer doing this. He is only adding hydrogen gas and a very stable oxide, perhaps like calcium oxide. The hydrogen gas goes in ; some of that hydrogen reacts with the oxygen from the oxide to form what he calls nascent H2O, which is free water unbound to other water. This type of water has the correct energy to be a hydrino catalyst, and it transforms atomic hydrogen to hydrino. The water is ionized in the process and ultimately the original oxide cation captures it’s oxygen back. Any leftover hydrogen remains to be converted to hydrino later on.

    Mills has captured hydrino gas previously and performed experiments with it to characterize it. I don’t know if he has bothered to do the same for this particular setup.

  • Zephir

    To be honest, the Randell Mills is pretty smart a truly modern genius. His derivations of structure constant α and particle mass are worth of attention by itself. In addition, he’s incredibly productive, given the immense pile of textbooks and articles, which he already produced. Also these books are well organized and thoroughly written and skillfully illustrated – which is in striking contradiction with many crackpots.

    Some other things about Randell Mills look more suspiciously for me. For example his Millsian software for modeling the atom structure looks quite naive. My objections against hydrino model were already presented bellow. And the characterizations of various hydrino compounds isolated probably didn’t even pass Mills own standards – they were never attempted to replicate by Mills own team. Which is strange, because just these tangible samples would confirm the relevance of hydrino model in most reliable way.

    At the end the BLP’s experiments with evaporation of silver by supercap discharges apparently lack the basic control of energetic balance, so I’m forced to consider them only as a visual shows for investors without deeper substance. So that whereas Mills definitely deserves a success with compare to many other apparent frauds, I’m still forced to consider his own research poorly substantiated and ill defined.

  • Job001

    No, once ionized it is just hydrogen again.

  • GreenWin

    Thank goodness for predictable interglacial ends. We should be getter colder as the present Holocene comes to an end. We ARE getting cooler – mostly to spite Algore.

  • Mark Underwood

    Yes Mills has measured properties of hydrino by experiment in the lab. But obviously those experiments can’t be carried out on distant clouds of dark matter.

    That said, Mills sees the extreme ultra violet and x-ray background radiation as evidence of ubiquitous hydrino (dark matter) formation throughout space.

  • Mark Underwood

    The water is only a temporary catalyst. Mills has changed the way the water comes about. What he does now is add H2 gas and some kind of stable oxide, like CaO.
    Some of the H reacts with the O of the oxide to form water. Other H then is catalyzed by the water to form hydrino. The water then dissociates, and the O ultimately returns to be captured by it’s cation, perhaps calcium. (Mills hasn’t revealed what oxide he is using.) Any excess H remains to be converted to hydrino at the next opportunity, etc.

  • Mark Underwood

    A short video posted by BrLP yesterday showing (what seems to me) some more progress in maximizing and perhaps controlling the reaction. (There didn’t seem to be a meltdown at least!)

    • artefact

      Nice video

    • Mark Underwood

      BrLP posted an update with a picture. There was indeed a meltdown. A thick refratory molybdenum sleeve, with melting point of about 2600 C was melted through. See at

  • doug marker

    The hydrinos appear to be what is known as ‘dark matter’. If we consider Mills is right about them, then his explanation seems to make sense in that hydrinos don’t emit any photons as they are unable to absorb them (so can never emit them). Thus they can’t be seen but exist as a form of dense hydrogen. Am assuming like normal H they will form bonded pairs as in diatomic H.

    The impression I have is that hydrinos might be better described as the new stable and unchanging form of hydrogen. Hydrogen at ground state, like most other atoms, has electron(s) that can absorb photons and emit them stepping between the various energy levels we currently understand atoms can operate at.

    It is an interesting question as to if (or why not) hydrinos can or can not interact with other matter. My cursory grasp of their energy state, is that they can’t and thus become ‘inert’ atoms that merely occupy space. If they are dark matter then this is already said to occupy the majority of space as we know it.

    A further thought I have is if hydrinos/dark matter do occupy the majority of space then are they carriers of ‘Waves’ of any sort. Presumably an energy wave could travel through space (hydrinos/dark matter) even if we can’t ‘see’ them. This line opens up a lot of interesting avenues.

    Doug Marker

  • radvar

    Page 22 here:

    “Non-polluting: by-product is harmless lower energy state of hydrogen called Hydrino®, lighter than air, vents to space”

    Remember folks, if you use the term “hydrino”, you gotta include the &reg (registered trademark sign)

  • doug marker

    I don’t believe the chamber needs to be completely sealed. There is no reason or need that I can see. There must be fluctuations in internal pressure that should need to be vented. Perhaps vent traps are used as on the other hand they wouldn’t want vaporised silver puffing out through open holes.

    One other interesting point re hydrinos, is that if H becomes a hydrino, it essentially disappears and can’t be detected anymore. If someone believes it can be detected, the question is “what with” ?.

    Doug Marker.

  • Ged

    Gravity interactions, maybe very weakly direct, but not the sort of interaction the baryonic matter we and everything visible is made of. You can’t escape that whales interact with light and each other directly, as such dark matter has been long known to not be baryonic. So far, Weakly Interacting Massive Particled (WIMPs) are the best guess and best supported idea for dark matter. That or some form of neutrinos.

  • Mark Underwood

    Here’s the deal. Moving charge spread over a two dimensional surface (as per Mill’s bound electron) can be shown to not radiate under certain conditions. It is called the Haus non radiation condition.

    In a normal excited state, an electron radiates one discrete energy packet of a particular wavelength, and falls inward toward the ground state. While it is falling, it doesn’t radiate. So it happens to meets the non radiation condition while it is falling and when it arrives in a stable orbit.

    Now when atomic hydrogen encounters a catalyst that can receive a specific amount of energy, namely a multiple of 27.2 eV, it gives that amount of energy to the catalyst via a resonant, non photonic process. The catalyst ionizes as a result of receiving that energy. Meanwhile the hydrogen’s electron, which has given up a multiple of 27.2 eV to the catalyst, becomes unstable and begins to fall to an even lower, stable below ‘ground’ energy state. While it is falling inward, it happens to not meet the Haus non radiation condition. So during the process of falling it emits continuum radiation as it accelerates inward, just as any accelerating charge would be expected to emit radiation according to standard classical electromagnetic theory. Then when it arrives at the stable hydrino state it meets the Haus non radiation condition again and no longer radiates.

    There is a little more to it (as per Mill’s theory), such as generating hot (fast moving) hydrogen instead of radiation. But that’s the gist.

  • Ged

    Experimental data. Every bit of modern technology works as we know from empirical work how electrons act and how big they are. We don’t need theory alone, we already know from direct measurement. We can fire electrons at an object and see it at tens of thousands of magnification (EM Microscope), we can launch electrons at a phosphorus screen and display an image (CRT), we can shoot electrons at near the speed of light through a ring and every time they bend they give off radiation, generally X-rays, which we can use for a myriad of experiments including X-ray crystallography.

    But we can also use electrons and blast them at the nucleons of an atom and see inside of a proton or a neutron, and actually see the three masses that are the quarks that make up baryonic matter. Leptons, in particular electrons, would react with proton of a hydrogen/hydrino. Ionizations would occur, and radiation would be given off. We see none of that with dark matter, yet 90% of the universe’s mass is supposedly the stuff.

    One can throw away the Standard Model and QM all one wants, but one cannot escape experimental results, and whatever one decides should replace SM and QM has to agree with all the data gathered over all time. Hopefully there are folks up to that challenge, and won’t stop half way!

  • Ged

    Fair enough. I’m only looking at the data we have here so far, and it does not make sense with what is currently known. But, that can always change, that’s the point of the progress of science.

  • Roland

    Someone has…

  • Fedir Mykhaylov

    The use of silver apparently connected with the struggle with evil spirits? Why not use cheaper metals such as copper or sodium?

    • Ged

      Quite the contrary. It took empirical evidence, the Wright brother’s kitty hawk, to show it could be done, when many of the leading theorists at the time said no.

      By the way, when trains were starting to be a thing, some folks objected to them saying that in theory going >=30 MPH should cause a heart attack and kill a person (not realizing the difference in accelleration and velocity). There are many funny little things like that in history.

    • Mark Underwood

      First and foremost silver is an excellent conductor (better than copper), so the voltage required for a detonation is greatly reduced. From the latest short video with the blinding light, I think a person working the control was reporting the input power at (just) 1.65 volts (and 1200 amps).

      Second, I believe silver vapor is an excellent absorber of UV, and it then it gets (literally) white hot.

      Thirdly, at high temperatures silver is impervious to water and oxidation, if I recall. That was back when H20 was used in the Suncell. As of late they are using H2 gas and a very stable oxide so I’m not sure if that is as much of an issue.