Brilliant Light Power Presentation on 6 December 2016 in Washington, DC (Tom Whipple — Update: Full Video Posted)

UPDATE (December 9, 2016): BLP has posted a video of the December 6 meeting where CEO Randell Mills presents the company’s plans and vision, and also shows a prototype of the SunCell:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/G5ZLqp1dX14

The following report has been submitted by Tom Whipple who attended the Brilliant Light Power ‘Roadshow’ meeting held in Washington, DC yesterday.

For the last three years, Randell Mills, the CEO of Brilliant Light Power, has been conducting semi-public presentations to invited audiences about the progress he and his colleagues have been making in developing an entirely new source of energy that one day might replace all existing sources of energy including fossil fuels, nuclear, and renewables. As Brilliant Light gets closer to completing the development of a working prototype of its SunCell, the company has begun to focus on plans for marketing the device around the world.

This week Mills and his Director of Business Development, Dominic Jones, took their presentation on the road to spread the news of the progress they are making to a wider audience. On December 6th they gave a presentation to an invited audience in Washington, DC and later this month will give a presentation in London. It has only been six weeks since a similar update was given at Brilliant Light’s headquarters in Cranbury, NJ. While there appear to have been no developments in the last month, the presentation gave some new insights into the origin of the technology, the progress the company expects in the coming year, and several important changes in marketing plans. All this, of course, assumes that reliably working prototypes will be completed on schedule in the next six months and that they will be successful in testing by prospective partners of Brilliant Light who have expressed interest in building or distributing SunCells.

In late October, Mills and Brilliant Light had prototypes operating for hours under manual control after having overcome the numerous technical challenges involved in igniting a plasma reaction that was capable of heating a carbide sphere to 3000oK. In the last few weeks, efforts have been directed towards automating the device by attaching sensors, processors, and controls that will allow SunCells to operate unattended. Given the temperatures involved, managing the heat in a device that can produce megawatts of energy would seem a formidable challenge. However, Mills continues to express optimism that the engineering involved has been completed and that we would see a self-controlled, continuously-operating device within the next few months.

The last step in producing working prototypes of the SunCell is to add the array of concentrated photovoltaic cells around the carbide black body radiator. Then to make sure the heat management system can remove excess energy from the solar cells, and enclose the device in a pressure dome. It now appears that the early versions of the SunCell are to produce circa 150 KW, which can be upgraded later by increasing the operating temperature of the black body radiator to 3500oK. The maximum the carbide sphere containing the plasma can handle is 4000oK. By using multilayered solar cells, and eventually increasing the size of the carbide sphere containing the plasma, much larger amounts of electricity can theoretically be produced.

For those familiar with Mills and his work over the last 25 years, the most interesting part of the Washington, DC presentation was Mills’ defense of why it has taken so long to move from first recognizing significant amounts of energy could be released by converting hydrogen atoms into “hydrinos.” It is, of course, first necessary to acknowledge that mainstream scientific thinking does not believe that a phenomenon such as Mills’ hydrino can exist, much less release massive amounts of energy as part of the conversion process.

Mills noted in his presentation that it took 22 years of theorizing and experimenting to develop a new theory of how an atom functions and then use this insight to search for new sources of energy. However, it has only been three years since the “Eureka” moment in late 2013 when he first recognized how the hydrogen to hydrino conversion process could be used to produce commercial amounts of power. The Eureka came with the discovery of an arc plasma technique that allowed an explosive release of energy within 1/1000 of a second.

Since that time, the development of the SunCell has become more of an engineering problem than a science project. The explosive conversion to hydrinos had to be repeated 1000 times per second to produce continuous power; the catalyst used in the reaction had to be completely recycled for years so that hydrogen from water was the only substance consumed in the reaction; and finally a solution to the vaporizing of the tungsten electrodes that initiated the reaction had to be found before a power-producing device could be marketed. Although these steps have been largely accomplished, it could take months of trials to ensure that a reliable device is ready for market.

Mills reiterates that the SunCell is composed largely of off-the-shelf components that have been proven in other uses and that there are no moving parts. In theory, the remaining steps to commercialization could be accomplished rather quickly. However, with a small device producing unprecedented amounts of power, working at the fringes of technology at extraordinarily high temperatures, there would seem to be a possibility of unknown unknowns that could delay the best-planned schedule.

Following Mills technical presentation, Dominic Jones, in charge of business development, gave an update on Brilliant Light’s marketing strategy. In the last six weeks, marketing plans have been considerably fleshed out and some key pricing has been changed. Brilliant Light sees its market as being worldwide and divided into stationary and motive segments. SunCells would be leased through distributors to industrial, commercial, and residential markets. Mobile versions of the SunCell would be leased to development partners who would presumably rework the devices for suitability in the mobile commercial, consumer, and marine markets.

A new plan has 150 kW SunCells initially leasing at $90/day + plus a $2000 installation fee or about $32,850 per year. This price would amount to about 2.5 cents per kWh for those users, industrial and commercial establishments and multifamily residential buildings, that can utilize the entire output from the device. For users needing less than the full output of the device the costs would be proportionally higher and the remaining energy would be dumped. Given that the direct operating costs of the device are expected to be around 1/10 of a cent per kWh there is plenty of margin to cover distributors, distribution costs, and maintenance that may occur over the life of the machine.

The next time we hear from Mills and Brilliant Light Power, it seems possible that they may be very close to having a device ready for field testing, or, of course, may have encountered delays.

  • RLittle

    “Mills’ defense of why it has taken so long to move from first
    recognizing significant amounts of energy could be released by
    converting hydrogen atoms into “hydrinos.”” ” Mills noted in his presentation that it took 22 years of theorizing and
    experimenting to develop a new theory of how an atom functions and then
    use this insight to search for new sources of energy.” ” it has only been three years since the “Eureka” moment in late 2013″ These quoted statements may be true and seem reasonable. But what is suspect and underhanded is how Mills seeks to contradict these statements by backdating his discovery to the early 1990s. The truth is that the developments did not occur in the early 1990s, as these quotes express the developments occurred after 2005. But as with Mills, likewise Krivits (in recent Scientific American) and Larsen also backdate Larsen’s discovery to 1997 { ” In 1997, theorist Lewis Larsen looked at some of this data ” and ” Physicist Allan Widom joined Larsen’s team in 2004 ” } but Widom and Larsen first publication only comes in May 2005. Similar such has been done by Piantelli…. It is so sad the corruption, deception and evils of this world.

    • hunfgerh

      Thank you for naming the Facts.

      • RLittle

        Hi hunfgerh, You are welcome. It is simply my nature to deal with facts. But this world is a lie. Very few people are honest.

    • Pardon me, but, your point seems muddled.and I didn’t get it on a ‘first read’ … can you possibly amplify or clarify it somehow? Thank you in advance.

      • Alain Samoun

        Maybe RLittle understand discovery and development differently but for me there are no contradiction,or “evil” , for Mills to say that he had the idea in the early 1990s and started to develop products in 2005?

        • RLittle

          My hope is only to be logical without inducing hate or naste comments but I have found this is hard whenever I try to involve myself. But I continue in hope of decency. No disrespect fo you Mr Samoun. No RLittle does not have his own understanding of discovery and development. RLittle is mostly following standard practice of the United States Patent and Trade Office (USPTO). According to USPTO an invention is not an invention until it has been understood, conceptualized, observed, computed and disclosed so as to reduce it to practice so that someone skilled in the trade can read a disclosure and implement the art invention. I am sorry to burst your bubble but in 1991 this was not the case for Mills. From 1991 through 2005, even Mills himself could not reduce his own idea to practice hence by USPTO (not RLittle) standards, his concept did not constitute an invention. Moreover after 2000, other inventors contributed ideas that are later incorporated by Mills to help develop later Eureka moments to practice. These other inventors should be given credit in all integrity for the development, especially when the one you are trying to give total credit uses ideas of others; it is only just. Since 2000 others have contributed publications concerning classical states in quantum systems and the new physics of others should be recognized. But this is just. And sadly many do not work for just. But I know you will likely get sore and angry but it is only just.

          • Alain Samoun

            Far from my intention in writing my previous post was to qualify or disqualify the work of Mills, I was only trying to understand what you meant, like Jim we did not understand your point.
            Now I understand that you do not consider that an invention is a real invention if it is not recognised by the USPTO. That is your privilege,living in a society where merchandising and profit are the goal, it is not surprising,and that probably is the source of what you call “evil”. But let me remind you that the Patent and Trademark Resource Center Program began in 1871, then should we say that before, inventions did not exist? That Galileo, having first the idea and then building the first telescope did not invent it? Anyway,my point also is that nobody invents something without the help of other humans who live or lived before him or her. The simple recognition of this should open the idea that we all are the inventors.

      • hunfgerh

        “but Widom and Larsen first publication only comes in May 2005”

        http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/WL/WLTheory.shtml

        I see no earlier article than 2005. Where is the muddle?

        • RLittle

          Thank you Sir. It is comforting that there are some of sound mind even if a faint light. In a dark world I treasure the few light so faint as yourself. But you are crucial for me. You inspire me amidst so much negative.

  • RLittle

    “Mills’ defense of why it has taken so long to move from first
    recognizing significant amounts of energy could be released by
    converting hydrogen atoms into “hydrinos.”” ” Mills noted in his presentation that it took 22 years of theorizing and
    experimenting to develop a new theory of how an atom functions and then
    use this insight to search for new sources of energy.” ” it has only been three years since the “Eureka” moment in late 2013″ These quoted statements may be true and seem reasonable. But what is suspect and underhanded is how Mills seeks to contradict these statements by backdating his discovery to the early 1990s. The truth is that the developments did not occur in the early 1990s, as these quotes express the developments occurred after 2005. But as with Mills, likewise Krivits (in recent Scientific American) and Larsen also backdate Larsen’s discovery to 1997 { ” In 1997, theorist Lewis Larsen looked at some of this data ” and ” Physicist Allan Widom joined Larsen’s team in 2004 ” } but Widom and Larsen first publication only comes in May 2005. Similar such has been done by Piantelli…. It is so sad the corruption, deception and evils of this world.

    • hunfgerh

      Thank you for naming the Facts.

      • RLittle

        Hi hunfgerh, You are welcome. It is simply my nature to deal with facts. But this world is a lie. Very few people are honest.

    • Pardon me, but, your point seems muddled.and I didn’t get it on a ‘first read’ … can you possibly amplify or clarify it somehow? Thank you in advance.

      • Alain Samoun

        Maybe RLittle understand discovery and development differently but for me there are no contradiction,or “evil” , for Mills to say that he had the idea in the early 1990s and started to develop products in 2005?

        • RLittle

          My hope is only to be logical without inducing hate or naste comments but I have found this is hard whenever I try to involve myself. But I continue in hope of decency. No disrespect fo you Mr Samoun. No RLittle does not have his own understanding of discovery and development. RLittle is mostly following standard practice of the United States Patent and Trade Office (USPTO). According to USPTO an invention is not an invention until it has been understood, conceptualized, observed, computed and disclosed so as to reduce it to practice so that someone skilled in the trade can read a disclosure and implement the art invention. I am sorry to burst your bubble but in 1991 this was not the case for Mills. From 1991 through 2005, even Mills himself could not reduce his own idea to practice hence by USPTO (not RLittle) standards, his concept did not constitute an invention. Moreover after 2000, other inventors contributed ideas that are later incorporated by Mills to help develop later Eureka moments to practice. These other inventors should be given credit in all integrity for the development, especially when the one you are trying to give total credit uses ideas of others; it is only just. Since 2000 others have contributed publications concerning classical states in quantum systems and the new physics of others should be recognized. But this is just. And sadly many do not work for just. But I know you will likely get sore and angry but it is only just.

          • Alain Samoun

            Far from my intention in writing my previous post was to qualify or disqualify the work of Mills, I was only trying to understand what you meant, like Jim we did not understand your point.
            Now I understand that you do not consider that an invention is a real invention if it is not recognised by the USPTO. That is your privilege,living in a society where merchandising and profit are the goal, it is not surprising,and that probably is the source of what you call “evil”. But let me remind you that the Patent and Trademark Resource Center Program began in 1871, then should we say that before, inventions did not exist? That Galileo, having first the idea and then building the first telescope did not invent it? Anyway,my point also is that nobody invents something without the help of other humans who live or lived before him or her. The simple recognition of this should open the idea that we all are the inventors.

      • hunfgerh

        “but Widom and Larsen first publication only comes in May 2005”

        http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/WL/WLTheory.shtml

        I see no earlier article than 2005. Where is the muddle?

        • RLittle

          Thank you Sir. It is comforting that there are some of sound mind even if a faint light. In a dark world I treasure the few light so faint as yourself. But you are crucial for me. You inspire me amidst so much negative.

    • optiongeek

      I think you might benefit from reading Holverstott’s book. The author provides an extensively researched chronology of Mills theoretical work, starting from his initial queries to Herman Haus regarding his independent rediscovery of the “non-radiation condition” and continues through to the present day. All major roadblocks and breakthroughs are covered. Mills theory was substantially complete when he published the first version of the GUTCP book in 1991.

      https://www.amazon.com/Randell-Mills-Search-Hydrino-Energy-ebook/dp/B01LDVWJ0I/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1473195444&sr=8-1&keywords=holverstott

  • Svein

    I guess the 150 kW is electric, so if it is 30% efficient it will all come from 500 kW of heat, and 350 kW of heat will need to be remowed. This must be ideal in a very cold place where you need a lot of heating too.

    • GordonDocherty

      Away from the tropics, try church buildings and old buildings, like here in the UK. They tend to have large areas to heat and are often VERY cold in winter…

  • Svein

    I guess the 150 kW is electric, so if it is 30% efficient it will all come from 500 kW of heat, and 350 kW of heat will need to be remowed. This must be ideal in a very cold place where you need a lot of heating too.

    • GordonDocherty

      Away from the tropics, try church buildings and old buildings, like here in the UK. They tend to have large areas to heat and are often VERY cold in winter…

      Also, biospheres such as in botanical gardens or, again here in the UK, the Eden project, not forgetting “farming” greenhouse / polytunnel applications, where both heat and light are required…

  • Nixter

    Video was posted on YouTube;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5ZLqp1dX14

    • sam

      They sure are professional.
      Will A.R. be able to compete with
      there sales price?
      Interesting the question about threats.

      • Nixter

        They both are planning on releasing functional hardware into the market, so the primary factor in determining the leader will be, who will be the first to market? Inventors tend to greatly underestimate the R&D required to get a working product out the door, so we must wait until the devices actually turn up “in the wild.” Both inventors have the same basic goals, ie; get their IP converted into something tangible, it will be obvious if and when the “miracle devices” appear. Rossi seems to be targeting manufacturing and industry interests, while Mills is going for a widely distributed grid type of market. Both will contribute to eliminating the planetary air pollution we are currently experiencing, the timing is perfect.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3e56482e54ceb325d495e8f5842b750c78f674feef65b2d24040b58b14a06437.jpg

        • cashmemorz

          Looking at the timing of these two tech’s and the competition to ensue, this scenario has the makings of repeating the similar error when the two universities pushed for premature publication in 1989. This time, because of similar dates of showing off “similar” tech at about the same time frame there potentially exists pressure to be first to do so and in the rush miss “a few last things to be perfected before market”. If either of them, or more likely both, miss finishing the last few things, then end up with a display that only partially works. If that happens, they could end up having the same effect on the LENR field the same as back then. If it happens again the media and the mainstream science will say never again to be taken in by false promises and this time for a much longer put down. Hope Mills and Rossi are aware of the harm their own actions can have on them if they rush things too much.

  • Nixter

    Video was posted on YouTube;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5ZLqp1dX14

    • sam

      They sure are professional.
      Will A.R. be able to compete with
      there sales price?
      Interesting the question about threats.

      • Nixter

        They both are planning on releasing functional hardware into the market, so the primary factor in determining the leader will be, who will be the first to market? Inventors tend to greatly underestimate the R&D required to get a working product out the door, so we must wait until the devices actually turn up “in the wild.” Both inventors have the same basic goals, ie; get their IP converted into something tangible, it will be obvious if and when the “miracle devices” appear. Rossi seems to be targeting manufacturing and industry interests, while Mills is going for a widely distributed grid type of market. Both will contribute to eliminating the planetary air pollution we are currently experiencing, the timing is perfect.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3e56482e54ceb325d495e8f5842b750c78f674feef65b2d24040b58b14a06437.jpg

        • cashmemorz

          Looking at the timing of these two tech’s and the competition to ensue, this scenario has the makings of repeating the similar error when the two universities pushed for premature publication in 1989. This time, because of similar dates of showing off “similar” tech at about the same time frame there potentially exists pressure to be first to do so and in the rush miss “a few last things to be perfected before market”. If either of them, or more likely both, miss finishing the last few things, then end up with a display that only partially works. If that happens, they could end up having the same effect on the LENR field the same as back then. If it happens again the media and the mainstream science will say never again to be taken in by false promises and this time for a much longer put down. Hope Mills and Rossi are aware of the harm their own actions can have on them if they rush things too much.

  • Well… given where they say they are now and the loud noises they are making… if the products evaporate again at the last minute, then they are done.

    Put up or shut up time for BLP. Last chance.

    • BadgerWI

      You’re right, I’ve looked in to all the “partners” for the prototype and production and the they all seem legit. So I don’t think they can just go away this time. Unless Columbia Tech wants to sink the reputation of their company we should find out pretty quick in the engineering process whether it works or not.

  • Well… given where they say they are now and the loud noises they are making… if the products evaporate again at the last minute, then they are done.

    Put up or shut up time for BLP. Last chance.

    • BadgerWI

      You’re right, I’ve looked in to all the “partners” for the prototype and production and the they all seem legit. So I don’t think they can just go away this time. Unless Columbia Tech wants to sink the reputation of their company we should find out pretty quick in the engineering process whether it works or not.

  • Leonard Weinstein

    There are several major problems the current approach has not yet discovered. The main ones are due to evaporation of the enclosure shell. Carbon evaporates fairly rapidly at 3000K to 3500K, even though the melting temperature is much higher for Carbon. Tungsten is the lowest vapor pressure at these temperatures, but even this is not small at 3000K to 3500K. I am sure a Tungsten coat on the Carbon is needed, and maximum working temperature will be restricted to 2500K for long periods of operation. In addition, the vapor (even Tungsten) would coat the photocells fairly quickly, and make them useless. The solution is an intermediate Quartz globe around the Tungsten coated Carbon sphere, with a Halogen between the Tungsten and Quartz. This would make a giant Halogen light source illuminating the photocells. This also drops the available energy to the cells somewhat, but not a lot. Overall, the output power for a given size system will be much less than suggested, but still a viable power source. The effect of Tungsten vapor on the interior of the globe may also be a longer range operation time problem, and may limit operation time before repair is needed.

    • Mike Henderson

      Here’s more info on why a little bit of iodine or bromine might mitigate the tungsten vaporization issue.

      “A halogen lamp, also known as a tungsten halogen, quartz-halogen or quartz iodine lamp, is an incandescent lamp that has a small amount of a halogen such as iodine or bromine added. The combination of the halogen gas and the tungsten filament produces a halogen cycle chemical reaction which redeposits evaporated tungsten back onto the filament, increasing its life and maintaining the clarity of the envelope. Because of this, a halogen lamp can be operated at a higher temperature than a standard gas-filled lamp of similar power and operating life, producing light of a higher luminous efficacy and color temperature.”

      Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halogen_lamp

      • Leonard Weinstein

        You should also note that the temperature of the globe has to be fairly high for this chemical reaction to work. The cooled photocells do not allow this directly (too cold), thus the need for an extra globe.

    • optiongeek

      I have queried Mills directly on sublimation. His responded that the manufacturer has guaraneteed their product will be free from sublimation at the operating temperature and conditions. No Tungsten nor Quartz required – just graphite in a pressurized environment with Hydrogen gas.

      • Leonard Weinstein

        If the dome is Carbon, and not a ceramic such as Tungsten Carbide, the people that guaranteed no sublimation are wrong. I do not have the vapor curve for Tungsten Carbide, but I expect it to be between Carbon or Tungsten alone. Carbon has a much higher vapor pressure than Tungsten at temperatures of 2500K to 3500K, even though the melting point of Carbon is higher. While the partial vapor pressure of the Carbon is very low, it is about 100 times higher than Tungsten at 3000K, and Tungsten lamps without the Halogen cycle coat lamp interiors in just thousands of hours, not years. You can’t get a Halogen cycle unless the outer globe is hot enough for the Halogen to dissolve the coating, thus an extra globe is needed (Halogen bulbs have an inner globe unless the hot outer surface is protected otherwise). The photocells surfaces would be cooled, and thus not permit Halogen recovery from this surface.

        • optiongeek

          Appreciate your feedback – you are clearly more knowledgeable on this topic than I am. Perhaps you should share your observations directly with Dr. Mills at the SoCP site? He’s typically very responsive to constructive criticism such as this. Sublimation was my chief concern but for whatever reason Mills seems to believe this issue has been solved. The prototype unit being developed by Columbia Tech does not appear to have any engineering devoted to this.

          • enantiomer2000

            He won’t. I have invited detractors and skeptics to address Mills directly on the SoCP site, but they never post there. Too bad, it would be interesting.

        • tlp

          It is not just plain carbon: R. Mills/Oct 31:
          “Two vendors guarantee no sublimation of proprietary graphitized carbon at 3000°C.”

    • Gerard McEk

      As far as I can understand, the electrodes are 2 molten silver fountains. They sit in the carbon dome. Very high currents run through the silver and where they collide the current causes a plasma in a evaporated silver atmosphere. Mills further said that they use HOH as source to form hydrino’s. What he also said is that till now there was no dome, because they need visual sight to control the plasma. So how did they get the HOH in the plasma?
      What did he mean by ‘self sustaining’? He said ‘the ignition can be switched off’ and the process continues. I guess it means the high voltage start-up to create the plasma is switched off, but I assume the high current (about 20 kA?) is still needed.
      Can ultra violet light pass the ‘black body’ carbon dome? I doubt it, infra red can, but not ultra violet! So the high power PV’s are sitting in the dark.

      • optiongeek

        HOH is not the fuel – it’s the catalyst. The fuel is gaseous H2 being diffused into the dome. The HOH catalyst is formed from the H2 and O from a “very stable oxide” that’s mixed into the molten silver. No HOH is lost in the reaction so no need to feed it in. There is a dome, it’s just not completely closed because they need to manually control the flow of molten silver. When the instrumentation, sensors and other control assembly is implemented they’ll be able to close the dome and operate normally. Switching off the input current is just that – they can turn off the 20kA completely, at first intermittently and indefinitely once the reaction stabilizes. The vaporized silver appears to provide the kinetics required to overcome the charge build up from the catalyst’s ionization that was limiting the reaction rate. The EUV radiation is absorbed by the carbon dome and re-emitted as blackbody radiation as it heats up to 3000K.

    • Zephir

      /* I am sure a Tungsten coat on the Carbon is needed */

      Tungsten reacts with carbon readily at high temperatures.

  • My confidence in BLP is rising for the following reasons after watching the video below:

    They reached out to work with Princeton for validation and forwarding the science, but the Professors interested at Princeton were shut down by political opposition within the University.

    Their outward activity is now reaching fraudulent, criminal levels if their product is bogus. They are accepting money for licenses and issuing RFI’s for rapid manufacturing capabilities. In the scam scenario, their behavior would be increasingly risky for no reason when they got rich long ago (they have this in common with Rossi.)

    They claim the demo video within shows self sustaining energy production after turning off ignition power.

    They are diligently solving engineering problems related to very very high temperatures.

    I can’t help it, I like the argument about dark matter being hydrinos.

    —-

    The concerns remain though. They have been on the verge of commercialization for a loooooong time. The hydrino/classical theory has not gotten nearly any traction in Physics communities despite all the publications and interesting evidence. They seem to have no government investment nor interest — I’m sure the USG would have investigated their claims thoroughly at some point during the Obama Administration and they would have jumped on it.

    But this is starting to smell different. This is new behavior from them. They are making real business decisions and creating relationships with other companies. They come across as both very frustrated due to the never-waning skepticism and giddy at the business prospects — that’s what I would expect from people that had the real thing on the verge of breaking out. Scammers would not be as specific and would stamp out any doubts with smooth talk.

    My impressions. YMMV.

    • Gerard McEk

      I have still quite a few questions:
      As far as I can understand, the electrodes are 2 molten silver fountains. They sit in the carbon dome. Very high currents run through the silver and where they collide the current causes a plasma in a evaporated silver atmosphere. Mills further said that they use HOH as source to form hydrino’s. What he also said is that till now there was no dome, because they need visual sight to control the plasma. So how did they get the HOH in the plasma?
      What did he mean by ‘self sustaining’? He said ‘the ignition can be switched off’ and the process continues. I guess it means the high voltage start-up to create the plasma is switched off, but I assume the high current (about 20 kA?) is still needed.
      Can UV light pass the ‘black body’ carbon dome? I doubt it, infra red can but not UVt, maybe far UV can? So the high power PV’s are sitting in the dark?

      • Good questions. Maybe if someone can get a copy of the briefing for us. There were lots of detailed schematics but they were hard to see in the video.

        • Axil Axil

          The Dark Matter problem

          A major component of R. Mills theory is that hydrogen atoms are converted to dark matter. This stuff does not react chemically or electrically with anything after its formation. The ash from the SunCell is this dark matter and it somehow leaves the confinement of the SunCell avoiding dark matter buildup. This Buildup would produce an increase in pressure over time if the dark matter could not escape from the SunCell.

          I don’t understand how the dark matter can escape from the SunCell confinement. Hydrinos still have size even though it is a neutral particle. Neutrons can be detected even if they have no charge and are small. But they still shoud have spin or at least reactor with a magnetic field that would affect its spin.

          Being a neutral particle, the hydrino must be able to penetrate into the nucleus of other atoms like neutrons do. Even neutrinos can react with matter to produce light, and yet hydrinos have not been detected in any of the many neutrino detectors around to world.

          R Mills needs to fo some more work in his dark matter theory.

          • Veblin

            Falls Church News-Press
            Brilliant Light Power Goes on the Road
            By Tom Whipple
            https://fcnp.com/2016/12/08/brilliant-light-power-goes-road/

          • Gerard McEk

            The question is if the hypothetical hydrino would react with matter. Neutrons do, but hydrino’s may not, although I would say that they may more easily fuse with other atoms then hydrogen. Obviously their energy must be high enough.

          • Mark Underwood

            Note that even ordinary hydrogen gas (fuel) is able to diffuse through the graphite sphere and into the SunCell interior. Thus, hydrino will easily diffuse out.

            I don’t understand why you say that hydrino must be able to penetrate into the nucleus of other atoms. That’s like saying that atomic hydrogen must be able to penetrate into the nucleus of other atoms.

      • Leonard Weinstein

        The UV and other wavelengths of the plasma is absorbed by the dome and heats it to the high temperature. The high temperature dome then radiates the light as a combination of visible and near IR. The dome acts exactly like a large area Tungsten light bulb, to shine on the photocells. I have explained the problems this will cause, and solutions at my entry about 6 hours ago.

        • Gerard McEk

          But as Mill explaines in the video of the 6th of Dec., IR/visible light has a lot less power density than the far UV and I assume it would be less suitable for direct PV conversion. A Carnot cycle would be more efficient. He seems to contradict himself.

          • Zephir

            Of course, the necessity of UV cells is just an evasion for absence of direct calorimetry

          • Gerard McEk

            Maybe, but I think that Mills wants to generate electricity directly. When he puts this carbon dome around it, it will get so hot that it evaporates slowly and makes the PV cells dirty. No way this is simple engineering. If the process would really work, it takes years to make it work long enough to be commercial.

          • Zephir

            /* it takes years to make it work long enough to be commercial */

            Well, and maybe just this is the actual point of Randell Mills. Until he will not be forced to throw his technology into market, he will not be forced to take the responsibility.

      • Axil Axil

        Mills have said that only the power to the silver pumps are active when self sustain is underway. No arc power is supplied.

        • Gerard McEk

          Axil, can you imagen how the forming of the fractional Rydberg mass (hydrino) would work without the arc?

          • Axil Axil

            At 1:03 of the video, R Mills states that the self sustain mode of plasma ignition is caused by the sufficient amount of silver vapor pressure. After warm up to that silver vapor pressure level, self sustain mode is self perpetuating. No additional input power is required in SSM from then on.

            But Mills demonstrated SSM in a near vacuum while venting the silver vapor. If I had attended that demo, I would have asked a whole lot of questions,

            I beleive that the SunCell is a LENR system because the power density of 5 megawatts in a few cubic centimeters of volume is far too high for a Hydrino reaction.

      • Axil Axil

        The carfon dome converts the XUV light to visible light so that the PV cells can process it. Someday XUV will be converted directly by as yet undeveloped XUV PV cells.

      • doug marker

        Silver is the carrier of the catalyst which is a ‘nascent water’ molecule (HOH) i.e. a water molecule that is just forming. HOH is not a standard water molecule it differs in that the H bonds have been removed.

        Key steps …
        1) Atomic H is formed by electrolysis and is ‘fuel’ it forms at the arc point
        2) Molten silver is used to carry the oxide catalyst and an electric current
        3) The silver is pumped into two jetstreams aimed at each other
        4) Each jetstream has a voltage of opposite polarity arcing as they meet
        5) The arcing where the silver jets meet produces ‘nascent water’ molecules (HOH) from the Oxide catalysts and the atomic H present at the point of arcing
        6) Atomic collisions allow the ‘nascent water molecule’ to absorb energy from the atomic H. The ‘nascent’ water molecule quickly releases this energy as photons and the H becomes a Hydrino.

        An extract from a MIlls paper on this …

        AbstractAtomic
        hydrogen is predicted to form fractional Rydberg energy states H(1/p)
        called “hydrino atoms” wherein n = 1/2,1/3,1/4,…,1/p (p ≤ 137 is an
        integer) replaces the well-known parameter n = integer in the Rydberg
        equation for hydrogen excited states. The transition of H to a stable
        hydrino state H[aH/p = m + 1] having a binding energy of p2⋅13.6 eV
        occurs by a nonradiative resonance energy transfer of m⋅27.2 eV (m is an
        integer) to a matched energy acceptor such as nascent H2O that has a
        potential energy of 81.6 eV (m = 3). The nascent H2O molecule formed by
        an oxidation reaction of OH− at a hydrogen anode is predicted to serve
        as a catalyst to form H(1/4) with an energy release of 204 eV compared
        to the 1.48 eV required to produce H from electrolysis of H2O.”

        The full paper …
        https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264005645_Solid_fuels_that_form_HOH_catalyst

        Cheers

        Doug Marker
        Sydney Australia.

        • Gerard McEk

          Thanks Doug. The ‘fractional Rydberg’ state for a hydrino is new for me, but interesting. Listening to Mill must be an ordeal for many, talking a lot, saying little and the endless repetition of ‘massive power’.
          Can you imagen how this process can work without the massive current? Rydberg matter can form through photons. Once these photons are around it will continue?

          • doug marker

            Gerald,

            Must admit I fit into the camp that likes the elegance of Mills theories esp his electron orbital as I was choking on the Quantum theory for electrons. But, elegance isn’t enough ! – it must be shown to work too 🙂

            I really do hope he gets a working prototype going in 2017, But, I believe he is still far too optimistic. There is IMHO still too much engineering required to solve some very complex challenges. But, if Mills gets lucky some very bright people may solve his engineering challenges.

            As to the ‘electrode’ current, am not at all bothered by his claims in that area. I do believe his numbers stack up as claimed.

            Cheers

            Doug

      • Zephir

        I don’t understand, why the use the HOH, if the oxygen dilutes the reaction mixture and the water would corrode the carbon dome way faster than the pure hydrogen. The oxygen involved fusion is way more probable here.

    • Axil Axil

      Mill’s invention like all other forms of LENR has yet to be discovered production of massive subatomic particle emissions that will make it a electric utility device only. Most of the dreams of distributed LENR power production will not come to pass. So get set for some BIG disappointments ahead.

      • Are you worried about the waste heat? We dump waste heat all the time.

    • Axil Axil

      Regarding: “I can’t help it, I like the argument about dark matter being hydrinos.”

      The hydrino cannot be smaller than the neutron. It must behave like the neutron. We should see hydrino damage on the structure of the SunCell and maybe even activation as hydrino kinetic energy is converted to gamma by impact with reactor structure. We might also expect to see nuclear reactions produced by hydrinos and associated transmutation as the hydrino enters nuclei. Dark matter does not do that sort of thing. What keeps hydrinos from acting like neutrons?

      • What keeps hydrinos from acting like neutrons?

        Hydrinos, if real, would still have an outer electron shell and would at any given time present to its surroundings a small rapidly rotating dipole. I imagine its small size and generally neutral character would allow it to go places regular hydrogen cannot. And that its tight dipole nature could act like a crowbar around some other atoms, perhaps jacking up the probability of certain chemical and nuclear reactions.

  • My confidence in BLP is rising for the following reasons after watching the video below:

    They reached out to work with Princeton for validation and forwarding the science, but the Professors interested at Princeton were shut down by political opposition within the University.

    Their outward activity is now reaching fraudulent, criminal levels if their product is bogus. They are accepting money for licenses and issuing RFI’s for rapid manufacturing capabilities. In the scam scenario, their behavior would be increasingly risky for no reason when they got rich long ago (they have this in common with Rossi.)

    They claim the demo video within shows self sustaining energy production after turning off ignition power.

    They are diligently solving engineering problems related to very very high temperatures.

    I can’t help it, I like the argument about dark matter being hydrinos.

    —-

    The concerns remain though. They have been on the verge of commercialization for a loooooong time. The hydrino/classical theory has not gotten nearly any traction in Physics communities despite all the publications and interesting evidence. They seem to have no government investment nor interest — I’m sure the USG would have investigated their claims thoroughly at some point during the Obama Administration and they would have jumped on it.

    But this is starting to smell different. This is new behavior from them. They are making real business decisions and creating relationships with other companies. They come across as both very frustrated due to the never-waning skepticism and giddy at the business prospects — that’s what I would expect from people that had the real thing on the verge of breaking out. Scammers would not be as specific and would stamp out any doubts with smooth talk.

    My impressions. YMMV.

    • Gerard McEk

      I have still quite a few questions:
      As far as I can understand, the electrodes are 2 molten silver fountains. They sit in the carbon dome. Very high currents run through the silver and where they collide the current causes a plasma in a evaporated silver atmosphere. Mills further said that they use HOH as source to form hydrino’s. What he also said is that till now there was no dome, because they need visual sight to control the plasma. So how did they get the HOH in the plasma?
      What did he mean by ‘self sustaining’? He said ‘the ignition can be switched off’ and the process continues. I guess it means the high voltage start-up to create the plasma is switched off, but I assume the high current (about 20 kA?) is still needed.
      Can UV light pass the ‘black body’ carbon dome? I doubt it, infra red can but not UVt, maybe far UV can? So the high power PV’s are sitting in the dark?

      • Good questions. Maybe if someone can get a copy of the briefing for us. There were lots of detailed schematics but they were hard to see in the video.

      • Leonard Weinstein

        The UV and other wavelengths of the plasma is absorbed by the dome and heats it to the high temperature. The high temperature dome then radiates the light as a combination of visible and near IR. The dome acts exactly like a large area Tungsten light bulb, to shine on the photocells. I have explained the problems this will cause, and solutions at my entry about 6 hours ago.

        • Gerard McEk

          But as Mill explaines in the video of the 6th of Dec., IR/visible light has a lot less power density than the far UV and I assume it would be less suitable for direct PV conversion. A Carnot cycle would be more efficient. He seems to contradict himself.

          • enantiomer2000

            Did you watch the video? He explains why he doesn’t want to use a heat engine.

          • Zephir

            Why not? Because his funding would stop way earlier?

          • Zephir

            Of course, the necessity of UV cells is just an evasion for absence of direct calorimetry

          • Gerard McEk

            Maybe, but I think that Mills wants to generate electricity directly. When he puts this carbon dome around it, it will get so hot that it evaporates slowly and makes the PV cells dirty. No way this is simple engineering. If the process would really work, it takes years to make it work long enough to be commercial.

          • Zephir

            /* it takes years to make it work long enough to be commercial */

            Well, and maybe just this is the actual point of Randell Mills. Until he will not be forced to throw his technology into market, he will not be forced to take the responsibility.

      • Axil Axil

        Mills have said that only the power to the silver pumps are active when self sustain is underway. No arc power is supplied.

        • Gerard McEk

          Axil, can you imagen how the forming of the fractional Rydberg mass (hydrino) would work without the arc?

          • Axil Axil

            At 1:03 of the video, R Mills states that the self sustain mode of plasma ignition is caused by the sufficient amount of silver vapor pressure. After warm up to that silver vapor pressure level, self sustain mode is self perpetuating. No additional input power is required in SSM from then on.

            But Mills demonstrated SSM in a near vacuum while venting the silver vapor to keep the SunCell from melting down. If I had attended that demo, I would have asked a whole lot of questions,

            I beleive that the SunCell is a LENR system because the power density of 5 megawatts in a few cubic centimeters of volume is far too high for a Hydrino reaction.

      • Axil Axil

        The carfon dome converts the XUV light to visible light so that the PV cells can process it. Someday XUV will be converted directly by an as yet undeveloped XUV PV cells.

      • doug marker

        Silver is the carrier of the catalyst which is a ‘nascent water’ molecule (HOH) i.e. a water molecule that is just forming. HOH is not a standard water molecule it differs in that the H bonds have been removed.

        Key steps …
        1) Atomic H is formed by electrolysis and is ‘fuel’ it forms at the arc point
        2) Molten silver is used to carry the oxide catalyst and an electric current
        3) The silver is pumped into two jetstreams aimed at each other
        4) Each jetstream has a voltage of opposite polarity arcing as they meet
        5) The arcing where the silver jets meet produces ‘nascent water’ molecules (HOH) from the Oxide catalysts and the atomic H present at the point of arcing
        6) Atomic collisions allow the ‘nascent water molecule’ to absorb energy from the atomic H. The ‘nascent’ water molecule quickly releases this energy as photons and the H becomes a Hydrino.

        An extract from a MIlls paper on this …

        AbstractAtomic
        hydrogen is predicted to form fractional Rydberg energy states H(1/p)
        called “hydrino atoms” wherein n = 1/2,1/3,1/4,…,1/p (p ≤ 137 is an
        integer) replaces the well-known parameter n = integer in the Rydberg
        equation for hydrogen excited states. The transition of H to a stable
        hydrino state H[aH/p = m + 1] having a binding energy of p2⋅13.6 eV
        occurs by a nonradiative resonance energy transfer of m⋅27.2 eV (m is an
        integer) to a matched energy acceptor such as nascent H2O that has a
        potential energy of 81.6 eV (m = 3). The nascent H2O molecule formed by
        an oxidation reaction of OH− at a hydrogen anode is predicted to serve
        as a catalyst to form H(1/4) with an energy release of 204 eV compared
        to the 1.48 eV required to produce H from electrolysis of H2O.”

        The full paper …
        https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264005645_Solid_fuels_that_form_HOH_catalyst

        Cheers

        Doug Marker
        Sydney Australia.

        • Gerard McEk

          Thanks Doug. The ‘fractional Rydberg’ state for a hydrino is new for me, but interesting. Listening to Mill must be an ordeal for many, talking a lot, saying little and the endless repetition of ‘massive power’.
          Can you imagen how this process can work without the massive current? Rydberg matter can form through photons. Once these photons are around it will continue?

          • doug marker

            Gerald,

            Must admit I fit into the camp that likes the elegance of Mills theories esp his electron orbital as I was choking on the Quantum theory for electrons. But, elegance isn’t enough ! – it must be shown to work too 🙂

            I really do hope he gets a working prototype going in 2017, But, I believe he is still far too optimistic. There is IMHO still too much engineering required to solve some very complex challenges. But, if Mills gets lucky some very bright people may solve his engineering challenges.

            As to the ‘electrode’ current, am not at all bothered by his claims in that area. I do believe his numbers stack up as claimed.

            Cheers

            Doug

      • Chuck Valdez

        No, the arc current is off. Energy to maintain plasma state is coming from new hydrogen input while product hydrinos continue to diffuse through carbon dome. He has not yet indicated whether any new reactions not involving water may be active in this mode. Or perhaps a hydrino molecule other than H(1/4) is involved here. I await the latest news with you all.

      • Zephir

        I don’t understand, why the use the HOH, if the oxygen dilutes the reaction mixture and the water would corrode the carbon dome way faster than the pure hydrogen. The oxygen involved fusion is way more probable here.

        • Mark Coffman

          Water is the vehicle for the catalyst.

      • Mark Coffman

        Black Body implies that they absorb all frequency spectrums of light including UV
        but then reemit the energy as a fixed black body spectrum of light that includes Infra
        red. The exact emission spectrum is a function of how hot the black body gets but
        can be white light if the black body reaches a specific temperature.

    • Axil Axil

      Mill’s invention like all other forms of LENR has yet to be discovered production of massive subatomic particle emissions that will make it a electric utility device only. Most of the dreams of distributed LENR power production will not come to pass. So get set for some BIG disappointments ahead.

      • HiggsField

        You don’t know this? This is just supposition on your part.

        • Axil Axil

          There are indications from Me356 reports and Holmlid experiments that massive ionization is occurring. I beleive that this ionization is coming from meson production through the decay of matter.

      • Are you worried about the waste heat? We dump waste heat all the time.

    • Axil Axil

      Regarding: “I can’t help it, I like the argument about dark matter being hydrinos.”

      The hydrino cannot be smaller than the neutron. It must behave like the neutron. We should see hydrino damage on the structure of the SunCell and maybe even activation as hydrino kinetic energy is converted to gamma by impact with reactor structure. We might also expect to see nuclear reactions produced by hydrinos and associated transmutation as the hydrino enters nuclei. Dark matter does not do that sort of thing. What keeps hydrinos from acting like neutrons?

      • What keeps hydrinos from acting like neutrons?

        Hydrinos, if real, would still have an outer electron shell and would at any given time present to its surroundings a small rapidly rotating dipole. I imagine its small size and generally neutral character would allow it to go places regular hydrogen cannot. And that its tight dipole nature could act like a crowbar around some other atoms, perhaps jacking up the probability of certain chemical and nuclear reactions.

  • Leonard Weinstein

    If the dome is Carbon, and not a ceramic such as Tungsten Carbide, the people that guaranteed no sublimation are wrong. I do not have the vapor curve for Tungsten Carbide, but I expect it to be between Carbon or Tungsten alone. Carbon has a much higher vapor pressure than Tungsten at temperatures of 2500K to 3500K, even though the melting point of Carbon is higher. While the partial vapor pressure of the Carbon is very low, it is about 100 times higher than Tungsten at 3000K, and Tungsten lamps without the Halogen cycle coat lamp interiors in just thousands of hours, not years. You can’t get a Halogen cycle unless the outer globe is hot enough for the Halogen to dissolve the coating, thus an extra globe is needed (Halogen bulbs have an inner globe unless the hot outer surface is protected otherwise). The photocells surfaces would be cooled, and thus not permit Halogen recovery from this surface.

    • optiongeek

      Appreciate your feedback – you are clearly more knowledgeable on this topic than I am. Perhaps you should share your observations directly with Dr. Mills at the SoCP site? He’s typically very responsive to constructive criticism such as this. Sublimation was my chief concern but for whatever reason Mills seems to believe this issue has been solved. The prototype unit being developed by Columbia Tech does not appear to have any engineering devoted to this.

    • tlp

      It is not just plain carbon: R. Mills/Oct 31:
      “Two vendors guarantee no sublimation of proprietary graphitized carbon at 3000°C.”

  • Gerrit

    not once have I been positively surprised by a BLP demo. When I come to think of it, this is also true for Rossi demonstrations.

    Sadly there haven’t even been any scientific results lately that make me feel optimistic. SKINR – nothing ; CEES – nothing ; Tohoku – nothing ; MFMP – nothing ?

    I am still hanging on, but the thrill is gone.

    • Axil Axil

      If R Mills claims are true, which I do not doubt, then the production of a self sustaining plasma reaction over minutes is a breakthrough. You are hard to please!

    • psi2u2

      Sadly, at this time I must agree. Let us hope we see something more definite soon. The world really needs this.

      • Zephir

        Why they should be deflected with atmosphere? Not to say, if they “don’t interact” with normal atoms?

        • Alastair Hodgson

          They may well enter the atmosphere, but they are calculated to be incredibly lightweight atoms, far lighter than our atmospheres gases. I’d imagine they would be lost again pretty quickly to atmospheric escape.

        • Mike Ivanov

          It seems like Mr. A. Rossi has solid competitor 🙂

          • Zephir

            Poor R. Mills could actually work for A.Rossi once it will turn out, that he maintains some form of cold fusion instead of hydrino formation – because on this fact all Mill’s patent are based. Once the Mill’s doesn’t utilize hydrino formation, then all his patents will lose their ground. Also cold fusion (20 MeV) is at least theoretically way more rich of energy, than the hydrino formation (327 eV max).

          • Bohem FromCz

            I think it is about 250 KeV (transition to p=137) !?

          • Zephir

            Actually Mills talks about 3.48 keV cutoff, but anyway – it’s still 1000-times less energy density than the fusion

            http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/Chapter-5_3.5_keV_feature.pdf

  • Gerrit

    not once have I been positively surprised by a BLP demo. When I come to think of it, this is also true for Rossi demonstrations.

    Sadly there haven’t even been any scientific results lately that make me feel optimistic. SKINR – nothing ; CEES – nothing ; Tohoku – nothing ; MFMP – nothing ?

    I am still hanging on, but the thrill is gone.

    • Axil Axil

      If R Mills claims are true, which I do not doubt, then the production of a self sustaining plasma reaction over minutes is a breakthrough. You are hard to please!

    • psi2u2

      Sadly, at this time I must agree. Let us hope we see something more definite soon. The world really needs this.

  • Gerard McEk

    Thanks Epi, but I have great doubts regarding the first two answers. The last answer is right but it reduces the efficiency of producing direct PV electricity.

  • Gerard McEk

    Thanks Epi, but I have great doubts regarding the first two answers. The last answer is right but it reduces the efficiency of producing direct PV electricity.

  • Axil Axil

    The Dark Matter problem

    A major component of R. Mills theory is that hydrogen atoms are converted to dark matter. This stuff does not react chemically or electrically with anything after its formation. The ash from the SunCell is this dark matter and it somehow leaves the confinement of the SunCell avoiding dark matter buildup. This Buildup would produce an increase in pressure over time if the dark matter could not escape from the SunCell.

    I don’t understand how the dark matter can escape from the SunCell confinement. Hydrinos still have size even though it is a neutral particle. Neutrons can be detected even if they have no charge and are small. But they still shoud have spin or at least react with a magnetic field that would affect its spin.

    Being a neutral particle, the hydrino must be able to penetrate into the nucleus of other atoms like neutrons do. Even neutrinos can react with matter to produce light, and yet hydrinos have not been detected in any of the many neutrino detectors around to world.

    R Mills needs to fo some more work in his dark matter theory.

    • HiggsField

      Do the hydrogen atoms stay in the hydrino state or does the electron return to it’s ground state? What is the energy equation for this whole reaction? I’m somewhat unclear where the excess energy actually comes from.

      • Axil Axil

        I think that the energy density produced by the SunCell is too high for the Hydrino reaction to explain. At most, there is just a few hundred electron volts per hydrogen atom in the conversion of hydrogen to hydrinos. At a constant power production of a megawatt, there is a huge amount of hydrogen required to feed the hydrino reaction. The SunCell reaction must be a nuclear one.

        Use your math skills to explore my feelings. Use 600 electron volts per atom as energy supplied per atom.

        • HiggsField

          I agree, and there in lies a potential problem. Does mills theory describe his reaction or not? You seem to be saying it does not. I think Mills needs to explain in some detail the entire reaction process. i.e. Where does the excess energy come from? He does not say it’s nuclear.

    • Justin

      Mills have been talking about this on his yahoo group. One thing many people ask for is pure hydrino gass. So far Mills and his team has not bean able to provide this. And the reason is that the hydriono is even smaller than hydrogen and hydrogen is already hard to contain. So the hydrino basically just leaks right out of the reactor, out of the building and in to space.

      • Axil Axil

        Under these hydrino ground rules, since the hydrino maintains its electron based repulsion relative to other matter, it cannot easily penetrate the walls of the SunCell as dark matter is theorized to do.

        Hydrino theory cannot have it both ways; it is either neutral or its not. Either choice has a unfavorable impact to the postulate that the Hydrino is dark matter.

        By definition, dark matter has only a gravitational effect on other matter. It is completely EMF neutral.

        The hydrino has spin so it can be confined using a magnetic field. Dark matter does not have spin since it is EMF non reactive.

        The hydrino cannot be smaller than the neutron. Even neutrons can be confined in a magnetic trap

        https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2000/01/neutron-trapping-demonstrated-first-time-nist

        Next, the hydrino is still an atom and must follow the rules of atom behavior. Atoms can not only give up photon energy but also absorb photon energy. In short. atoms give off and absorb photons. The spectrum of the SunCell light should therefore show hydrino photon absorption lines when hydrinos are reanimated back upto to the hydrogen ground state by a high energy XUV photon.

        Mills must explain why the hydrino does not follow these rules of basic Quantum mechanics and the standard model.

        • psi2u2

          Hydrino theory cannot have it both ways; it is either neutral or its not.

          Forgive the beginner’s question, but are we sure of this? I mean, if an electron is both a wave and particle, and if we can see its location but not its momentum, or calculate its momentum but not see its location (i.e. uncertainty principle), then perhaps other factors we take for granted at a human scale don’t apply universally, producing other such paradoxes in nature? Can we definitely say it is either neutral or not neutral? Sorry if that is a dumb question.

          • Axil Axil

            Hydrino theory cannot have it both ways; The theory can either follow the rules of quantum mechanics or it will not.

            “if we can see its location but not its momentum” is a dictum that comes out of the uncertainty principle. Hydrino theory does nor abide by this constraint.

            The hydrino theory rejects the notion of particles as waves because that is what quantum mechanics is based upon. Hydrino theory sees matter as particles and not waves to the best of my understanding.

          • psi2u2

            Thanks.

          • Mark Underwood

            Understand that GUTCP uses the deBroglie (momentum -wave) equation and other so called quantum features, while rejecting others.

          • Zephir

            The hydrino must be electrically neutral, because it’s composite of proton and electron. BTW This is first time I can see Axil Axill doubting someting…

      • Zephir

        Mills reportedly produced many compounds involving hydrino. Nobody still got some samples for independent analysis, despite that such a sample would be most simple and reliable evidence of hydrino existence. This is another warning label for me.

        http://i.imgur.com/OcVmvYj.jpg

        • MorganMck

          Have you asked Mills any of your many questions re hydrinos, etc. I see him engaging on similar issues frequently.

    • Gerard McEk

      The question is if the hypothetical hydrino would react with matter. Neutrons do, but hydrino’s may not, although I would say that they may more easily fuse with other atoms then hydrogen. Obviously their energy must be high enough.

    • Mark Underwood

      Note that even ordinary hydrogen gas (fuel) is able to diffuse through the graphite sphere and into the SunCell interior. Thus, hydrino will easily diffuse out.

      I don’t understand why you say that hydrino must be able to penetrate into the nucleus of other atoms. That’s like saying that atomic hydrogen must be able to penetrate into the nucleus of other atoms.

  • pg

    If Mill’s device does what is claimed, I will go and apologize in person for doubting him and his work.

    • doug marker

      To be honest, you would be wasting your time. The queue will be so long and the purpose so irrelevant that you can expect Mills and his partners to be busy doing something other than dealing with appologies. But your intentions are good 🙂

      D

  • pg

    If Mill’s device does what is claimed, I will go and apologize in person for doubting him and his work.

    • doug marker

      To be honest, you would be wasting your time. The queue will be so long and the purpose so irrelevant that you can expect Mills and his partners to be busy doing something other than dealing with appologies. But your intentions are good 🙂

      D

  • Hhiram

    I still have a hard time taking BLP seriously because there is no discussion of joules or COP. It’s trivial to produce megawatt events and plasmas for very short periods of time with regular electrical arcs, etc. The fact that Mills avoids these is, to me, a very bad sign. If you were trying to be deceptive, that’s exactly what you’d do.

    I have to confess I only skimmed the video. If Mills has finally *clearly* explained how much energy is yielded per unit mass of hydrogen fuel, AND how much fuel is being consumed per unit time, AND how much input energy is being provided per unit time, then I apologize to him and everyone else.

    Until then, I’m still extremely skeptical.

    • Mike Ivanov

      The reports shown on their web site, made by third party people and claim megawatts produced by cells for days and weeks.

  • Axil Axil

    There are indications from Me356 reports and Holmlid experiments that massive ionization is occurring. I beleive that this ionization is coming from meson production through the decay of matter.

  • Veblin

    Falls Church News-Press
    Brilliant Light Power Goes on the Road
    By Tom Whipple
    Duplicate of report above.
    https://fcnp.com/2016/12/08/brilliant-light-power-goes-road/

  • Axil Axil

    In the video at about 1:05, R Mills states that the SunCell is at best 30% to 40% efficient. At 1 MegaWatts of light output 600,000 kilowatts of heat will be produced and rejected as waste. Is that a problem?

    • Svein

      Mills was talking about reflecting light or heat back to the carbon doom, so light that was not collected by the 40% efficient sollarcell, would have an other try. How good this reflection will work is unknown till they have it up an running, but in theory it could give more than 50% efficiency. So then with150 kW of electricity produced it will only be 150kW of heat that need to be removed.This will be low grade heat at 80 degees Celsius or less.

      • Axil Axil

        Mills sales pitch wants it both ways. First he says that extraction of power through a heat exchanger is too big anf costly, where PVs are smaller and better. But then he says that the waste heat (50%) is rejected by a heat a microchannel exchanger at a extremely low temperature of 80C. That heat exchanger will need to be extremely large because low temperature heat exchange efficiency is extremely low at 80C. Mills has a big design problem here, with waste heat rejection.

        I don’t see any costs reflected in the material costs in his design plan for the waste heat exchanger.

        • Svein

          Mills also mention that the solarcells are the most expensive part of the unit. In cold places where heat is in high demand it might be good to have a unit without the solarcells and just let the dome radiate heat and light. It shoud be very cheap heat. In nothern part of Norway it is total darknes now, so light is also usefull.

          • tlp

            That is true, but also in cold places all that excess heat can be used for heating, so you get electricity and a lot of useful heat. Maybe they could build a model with small and cheap solar panels just to keep the system running, so no need for electrical connections at all, just a heater.

        • tlp

          Misc (radiator) $236.0
          PV heat management is built in, is included in that $15,000

  • Axil Axil

    In the video at about 1:05, R Mills states that the SunCell is at best 30% to 40% efficient. At 1 MegaWatts of light output 600 kilowatts of heat will be produced and rejected as waste. Is that a problem?

    • enantiomer2000

      No. The CPV units are designed to channel away heat most efficiently.

    • Svein

      Mills was talking about reflecting light or heat back to the carbon doom, so light that was not collected by the 40% efficient sollarcell, would have an other try. How good this reflection will work is unknown till they have it up an running, but in theory it could give more than 50% efficiency. So then with150 kW of electricity produced it will only be 150kW of heat that need to be removed.This will be low grade heat at 80 degees Celsius or less.

      • Axil Axil

        Mills sales pitch wants it both ways. First he says that extraction of power through a heat exchanger is too big and costly, whereas PVs are smaller, cheaper, more efficient, and better. But then he says that the waste heat (50%) is rejected by a heat microchannel exchanger to cool the PC cells at a extremely low temperature of 80C. That heat exchanger will need to be extremely large because low temperature heat exchange efficiency is extremely low at 80C. Mills has a big design problem here, with waste heat rejection.

        I don’t see any costs reflected in the material costs in his SunCell design plan for the waste heat exchanger.

        • Svein

          Mills also mention that the solarcells are the most expensive part of the unit. In cold places where heat is in high demand it might be good to have a unit without the solarcells and just let the dome radiate heat and light. It shoud be very cheap heat. In nothern part of Norway it is total darknes now, so light is also usefull.

          • tlp

            That is true, but also in cold places all that excess heat can be used for heating, so you get electricity and a lot of useful heat. Maybe they could build a model with small and cheap solar panels just to keep the system running, so no need for electrical connections at all, just a heater.

        • tlp

          Misc (radiator) $236.0
          PV heat management is built in, is included in that $15,000

  • enantiomer2000

    Or it could be that LENR is not possible as Dr Mills believes. Perhaps LENR is nothing more than hydrino?

  • Axil Axil

    Mills says that the is no moving parts in his SunCell but that cannot be true. He has a vacuum pump and a water coolant pump that will fail well before the 20 year lifetime of the reactor is reached.

    • tlp

      Those are very easily replaceable parts, and are very cheap. Water pump can very well last 20 years, cooling fans perhaps not. Vacuum pump is more expensive, but it is used very little, maybe just in the startup. Maybe it could be eliminated from the design?

      • Axil Axil

        Your car engine uses 2,5 inch hoses to move coolant to/from the radiator. Mills will never move enough coolant through the radiator using those 1/2 lines he has shown in the diagrams of the SunCell to the radiator.

        https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcST33z5bhOPRApzkLZje3stRimO4A_OYA1KRvLsq6pCyp-KE0iZ

        Mills has a long way to go before he will have a working system.

        • tlp

          That is quite old picture showing design principles. Look those new drawing made by Columbia Tech engineers in http://brilliantlightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/presentations/BrLP%20Presentation%20110716.pdf
          Slides 20-35. Much larger pipes there.
          As you said, this is very similar cooling problem as in a normal car.

          • Axil Axil

            The bottle neck then becomes the microchannels that cool the PV. Not much flow capacity through those microchannels.

            Some new imagineering required.

          • tlp

            But those microchannels are field proven technology, already in use in several CPV power plants, and the heat problem is the same there.

          • Axil Axil

            I will look into it

  • Axil Axil

    Mills says that the is no moving parts in his SunCell but that cannot be true. He has a vacuum pump and a water coolant pump, and the air cooling fans (20 cubic meters a second air flow required) on the coolant radiator that will fail well before the 20 year lifetime of the reactor is reached.

    • tlp

      Those are very easily replaceable parts, and are very cheap. Water pump can very well last 20 years, cooling fans perhaps not. Vacuum pump is more expensive, but it is used very little, maybe just in the startup. Maybe it could be eliminated from the design?

      • Axil Axil

        Your car engine uses 2,5 inch hoses to move coolant to/from the radiator. Mills will never move enough coolant through the radiator using those 1/2 lines he has shown in the diagrams of the SunCell to the radiator.

        https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcST33z5bhOPRApzkLZje3stRimO4A_OYA1KRvLsq6pCyp-KE0iZ

        Mills has a long way to go before he will have a working system.

        • tlp

          That is quite old picture showing design principles. Look those new drawing made by Columbia Tech engineers in http://brilliantlightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/presentations/BrLP%20Presentation%20110716.pdf
          Slides 20-35. Much larger pipes there.
          As you said, this is very similar cooling problem as in a normal car.

          • Axil Axil

            The bottle neck then becomes the microchannels that cool the PV. Not much flow capacity through those microchannels.

            Some new imagineering required.

          • tlp

            But those microchannels are field proven technology, already in use in several CPV power plants, and the heat problem is the same there.

          • Axil Axil

            I will look into it

  • RLittle

    Hi Sir, to suggest the hydrino in 1991 is not enough. Please read below the essence of invention and discovery as by USPTO. I am sorry I know you will get all bent out of shape and consider this personal with RLittle. But USPTO has standards for inventions and discoveries (this is not RLittle’s opinion) this is based on many many years of scientists, engineers, lawyers before my time (I am still a young man). But based on 3.5 U.S.C 112c of the United Staes Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) :

    (A) adequate written description,
    (B) enablement, and
    (C) best mode.
    The fact is that in 1991, this was not adequately written, enabled nor best mode given.

    This is USPTO; so hating on me is not an issue. With Kind Sincerity…

  • RLittle

    Hi Sir, to suggest the hydrino in 1991 is not enough. Please read below the essence of invention and discovery as by USPTO. I am sorry I know you will get all bent out of shape and consider this personal with RLittle. But USPTO has standards for inventions and discoveries (this is not RLittle’s opinion) this is based on many many years of scientists, engineers, lawyers before my time (I am still a young man). But based on 3.5 U.S.C 112c of the United Staes Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) :

    (A) adequate written description,
    (B) enablement, and
    (C) best mode.
    The fact is that in 1991, this was not adequately written, enabled nor best mode given.

    This is USPTO; so hating on me is not an issue. With Kind Sincerity…

  • RLittle

    From scientific perspective Prof Arnold Sommerfeld during the nineteen teens accounts for the hydrino; such hydrino is possible from Sommerfeld’s model as Sommerfeld used special relativity to note eccentric orbits of electrons about hydrogen. So this 1991 hydrino was not a totally new concept. But it is important that later after 2000, new concepts not included by Sommerfeld in the early 1900s were published by other scientists that reduce to practice novel phenomena beyond Sommerfeld and the work of these post 2000 scientists should not be negated. But my apologies if reasoning, logic annoys you. If it helps you continue in your thoughts.

  • RLittle

    From scientific perspective Prof Arnold Sommerfeld during the nineteen teens accounts for the hydrino; such hydrino is possible from Sommerfeld’s model as Sommerfeld used special relativity to note eccentric orbits of electrons about hydrogen. So this 1991 hydrino was not a totally new concept. But it is important that later after 2000, new concepts not included by Sommerfeld in the early 1900s were published by other scientists that reduce to practice novel phenomena beyond Sommerfeld and the work of these post 2000 scientists should not be negated. But my apologies if reasoning, logic annoys you. If it helps you continue in your thoughts.

  • Axil Axil

    In the latest SunCell video, R.Mills states that the heat in the Sun’s corona is generated by the hydrino reaction because the spectrum produced by the SunCell is the same as that produced by the Sun.

    If this is true, then the coronal eruptions on the Sun should produce fast moving hydrino particles headed toward earth and these (dark matter) hydrinos are highly penetrating like neutrinos. But even neutrinos interact with atoms and produce photons when neutrino kinetic energy is converted to EMF when neutrinos collide with atoms.

    The hydrino is very much larger than the neutrino so interaction with matter by the hydrino is much higher. There should be a large interaction observed in underground neutrino detectors when hydrinos ionize other atoms with their kinetic energy.

    This production of photons by hydrinos has not be seen in neutrino detectors worldwide. What is the explanation for this?

    • tlp

      Hydrinos differ many ways to neutrinos. Hyrdinos don’t interact with ordinary atoms. They are much heavier, so they don’t t travel in space same way as neutrinos, but are affected by gravitatational forces much more.

      • Gerard McEk

        If they have sufficient energy, they will more easily fuse with other matter than ordinary hydrogen. The energy the hydrino’s get while formed may indeed not be high enough to escape the sun’s gravity.

    • Job001

      Silly rabbit, hydrinos are “BELOW” ground state. This means they can only absorb precisely correct photons to get back up to ground state. Since no precisely correct photons are available in space, they will be “dark matter” and stable.

      • Zephir

        The more strange is, the hydrino doesn’t form a portion of hydrogen at comets, oceans, solar wind etc. What worse, Mills claims, there exists many subquantum levels for hydrinos, so that they should absorb at least some photons.

        I’m just waiting, how whole this hydrino comedy will finally end… 🙂

        • Job001

          They should not absorb some normal photons. The only photons the subquantum like p>3 will absorb would of necessity be very high energy, unlike visible or UV but into X-ray or gamma ray. The p=4 re

        • doug marker

          Just stick to crunching chips 🙂 – the sound output is at least sensible 🙂

  • Axil Axil

    In the latest SunCell video, R.Mills states that the heat in the Sun’s corona is generated by the hydrino reaction because the spectrum produced by the SunCell is the same as that produced by the Sun.

    If this is true, then the coronal eruptions on the Sun should produce fast moving hydrino particles headed toward earth and these (dark matter) hydrinos are highly penetrating like neutrinos. But even neutrinos interact with atoms and produce photons when neutrino kinetic energy is converted to EMF when neutrinos collide with atoms.

    The hydrino is very much larger than the neutrino so interaction with matter by the hydrino is much higher. There should be a large interaction observed in underground neutrino detectors when hydrinos ionize other atoms with their kinetic energy.

    This production of photons by hydrinos has not be seen in neutrino detectors worldwide. What is the explanation for this?

    • optiongeek

      Interesting observation. However please keep in mind that hydrinos aren’t neutrons – they remain atoms with a bound electron. Would a hydrino, even an energetic one, penetrate the atmosphere? I would think it would be deflected pretty quickly even if has only 1/64th the volume of H as claimed by Mills for the H[1/4] species. I don’t believe that hydrinos would be highly penetrating at all.

      • Zephir

        Why they should be deflected with atmosphere? Not to say, if they “don’t interact” with normal atoms?

        • optiongeek

          Huh? Of course they interact with normal matter. A hydrino is composed of charge, just like regular hydrogen. The only difference between hydrogen and hydrino is that hydrino has absorbed an energy hole and therefore shrunk in size. It will collide with other add-ons just as before but with a smaller cross section. It won’t absorb photons which makes it dark. Your assumption that hydrinos are highly penetrating isn’t supported by GUT-CP.

          • Job001

            Hydrinos are tiny per Mills with radius proportional to 1/p, so state p=4 is 1/4 ground state size and 64 fit into(cube for volume) a ground state atom volume.

          • optiongeek

            I agree with you Job001. However the question was why don’t neutrino traps detect energetic hydrinos from solar flares. However, given that neutrino traps are usually sited in very difficult places to reach, such as one mile below the surface of the earth, then I think you would agree that “highly penetrating” wouldn’t apply. I seriously doubt a hydrino could penetrate the atmosphere regardless of how energetic it was. It would be deflected back into space.

        • Peter Wolstenholme

          They don’t interact chemically with other atoms, or at least not in the same way as normal hydrogen, but they are still as massive although smaller, so they will interact physically, if they hit or are hit by atoms or should I rather say molecules. Plus gravity of course.

          • Zephir

            /* They don’t interact chemically with other atoms, or at least not in the same way as normal hydrogen,*/

            It shouldn’t be true even by Mills himself, who published many alleged compounds of said hydrinos. http://i.imgur.com/VW56zTz.jpg

            The more strange is, nobody else did ever see them, had been allowed to characterize them the more…

        • Alastair Hodgson

          They may well enter the atmosphere, but they are calculated to be incredibly lightweight atoms, far lighter than our atmospheres gases. I’d imagine they would be lost again pretty quickly to atmospheric escape.

    • tlp

      Hydrinos differ many ways to neutrinos. Hyrdinos don’t interact with ordinary atoms. They are much heavier, so they don’t t travel in space same way as neutrinos, but are affected by gravitatational forces.

      • Gerard McEk

        If they have sufficient energy, they will more easily fuse with other matter than ordinary hydrogen. The energy the hydrino’s get while formed may indeed not be high enough to escape the sun’s gravity.

    • Job001

      Silly rabbit, hydrinos are “BELOW” ground state. This means they can only absorb precisely correct photons to get back up to ground state. Since no precisely correct photons are available in space, they will be “dark matter” and stable.

      • Zephir

        The more strange is, the hydrino doesn’t form a portion of hydrogen at comets, oceans, solar wind etc. What worse, Mills claims, there exists many subquantum levels for hydrinos, so that they should absorb at least some photons.

        I’m just crunching chips and waiting, how this hydrino comedy will finally end… 🙂

        • Job001

          They should not absorb some normal photons. The only photons the subquantum like p>3 will absorb would of necessity be very high energy, unlike visible or UV but into X-ray or gamma ray. The p=4 required photon is 108.8 ev or is already classified as x-ray.

        • doug marker

          Just stick to crunching chips 🙂 – the sound output is at least sensible 🙂

    • Peter Wolstenholme

      Similar to the way the production of photons by fast moving hydrogen atoms would not be seen. The neutrino is something special, passing through the Earth with hardly any chance of noticing it. And neutrino detectors are normally deep. underground to ensure that nothing else gets there.
      You should not have written “highly penetrating like neutrinos”.

  • psi2u2

    Very interesting write-up. Thank you, Frank.

  • psi2u2

    Very interesting write-up. Thank you, Frank.

  • Zephir

    Why not? Because his funding would stop way earlier?

  • Zephir

    Mills reportedly produced many compounds involving hydrino. Nobody still got some samples for independent analysis, despite that such a sample would be most simple and reliable evidence of hydrino existence. This is another warning label for me.

    http://i.imgur.com/OcVmvYj.jpg

  • Zephir

    I don’t understand, why everyone is fascinated starring at SunCell and nobody is willing to take two silver wires and to check whether some excess of energy or spectrum anomaly emerges from electric arc running underwater. With compare to ECat there is apparently no secret ingredient and the experimental arrangement is very simple. IMO these experiments are just another variant of Mizuno’s plasma fusion, which demonstrated excess of energy already.

    • Jas

      I watched the Dec 16th presentation in London. Pretty much the same as the DC one. I need to have a moan though. At the end of the presentation when you get the questions from the guests, you cant hear what they are asking. Subtitles would be great. It would also be nice to see a shot from the back of the room to see how many persons are present. I wonder if some of the guests want to remain secret?

  • Zephir

    I don’t understand, why everyone is fascinated starring at SunCell and nobody is willing to take two silver wires and to check whether some excess of energy or spectrum anomaly emerges from electric arc running underwater. With compare to ECat there is apparently no secret ingredient and the experimental arrangement is very simple. IMO these experiments are just another variant of Mizuno’s plasma fusion, which demonstrated excess of energy already.

    • MorganMck

      But there is supposedly a secret ingredient (catalyst) introduced with the molten silver stream into a Hydrogen environment which is then “ignited” through an electrical charge across the two silver streams.

      • Mark Underwood

        Close. The catalyst is water. Mills used water at the beginning, but after experimenting found that too much ‘old’ water had a quenching effect on hydrino formation. So he experimented instead with creating the water inside the cell, using various heat resistant oxides which would give up their oxygen to create a fresh, new water molecule (and then when the water was ionized during hydrino formation would take the oxygen back). Apparently one oxide worked particularly well, and that one he is keeping a secret.

        • Zephir

          The presence of argon and water in SunCell reactor is notoriously known too. Still no one attempted for the replication of its COP – at least in quite qualitative way.

          • Mark Underwood

            Argon will not be used inside the emissive carbon dome as far as I know. It will be used outside the dome, merely to provide pressure equalization.

            The amount of water generated inside the cell will be very small. So it really isn’t comparable to what you seem to have in mind with electrolytic cold fusion reactions.

            Right, no one has attempted replication of the SunCell COP. Not even BrLP has tested the COP of a working SunCell because it is not yet working! But if you are talking about the COP of the hydrino reaction itself (not within the SunCell), then yes that has been measured by bomb calorimetry. (BrLP brought in a specialist some months ago,who did the calorimetry work which was reported at one of their industry days.)

      • Mark Coffman

        If you accept Mills hydrino theory then the Catalyst is no longer a secret .You just
        calculate what energy you need to absorb and then find a chemical system that
        will accept that energy. Just like downtown.

  • Preston

    They sure like to ridicule quantum mechanics but the entire semiconductor industry is built on quantum mechanics. Flash memory uses tunneling to store information and even a simple diode needs quantum mechanics to explain its behavior. If they do have another explanation for tunneling, it would need to end up with the same equations. Also, I doubt they can explain Bose–Einstein condensate without quantum mechanics. It’s kind of hard to take Mill’s seriously with all the physics outside of the standard model.

    • Axil Axil

      On the other hand, quantum physicists do overreach. There is multiple universes, computer code embedded inside supersymmetry, the cosmos as a computer…there are many wild ideas that people think up that give quantum mechanics a bad reputation,,,and besides there are a dozen versions of quantum mechanics, many of which are in conflict.

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

      • Preston

        I was reacting to the video presentation where they were making fun of QM making it sound like it’s just some silly math, but in reality it is the basis for a lot of common technology. Believe me, there wouldn’t be any giga-byte flash storage ICs if the silly math was off even a little. String theory does fit their description perhaps, and the multiverse, computer code etc is just theory, maybe just math fantasies. So if you want to lump all that into QM, some ridicule may be appropriate.

        QM is at the heart of the standard model of particle physics. Maxwell’s equations are perfectly fine when describing the behavior of a group of electrons (for example in a free electron laser) but at the particle level, the standard model has photons pushing electrons around and there isn’t any electric field. Each “field” whether it be from the strong force, electrical force, etc has a particle that transmits that force.

        I’m an engineer, not a physicist and will try to keep an open mind but it’s asking a lot.

        • optiongeek

          Tunneling is explained using classical laws. Consider a high jumper whose center of gravity passes below the bar yet he clears nonetheless. Any half-hearted attempt to defeat Mills’ theory will fail. He’s read QM and adjusted his theory over 25 years. In contrast, QM proponents haven’t read Mills.

          • Preston

            With QM the odds of that high jumper making a jump over a wall depends on the thickness of the wall. Consider two 20 foot tall steel walls, one is 1 foot thick, the other 1 inch thick. No chance for the jumper to make it over either wall, but with QM there is a chance – and the thinner wall lets lots more jumpers through.

    • tlp

      Not all of quantum mechanics is rejected, electrons have those quantum steps to excited states, those are physical facts. Many other things in quantum mechanics are not physical facts, and are now rejected when the real physical phenomenon are finally understood by Dr. Mills.

  • Preston

    They sure like to ridicule quantum mechanics but the entire semiconductor industry is built on quantum mechanics. Flash memory uses tunneling to store information and even a simple diode needs quantum mechanics to explain its behavior. If they do have another explanation for tunneling, it would need to end up with the same equations. Also, I doubt they can explain Bose–Einstein condensate without quantum mechanics. It’s kind of hard to take Mill’s seriously with all the physics outside of the standard model.

    • Axil Axil

      On the other hand, quantum physicists do overreach. There is multiple universes, computer code embedded inside supersymmetry, the cosmos as a computer…there are many wild ideas that people think up that give quantum mechanics a bad reputation,,,and besides there are a dozen versions of quantum mechanics, many of which are in conflict.

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

      • Preston

        I was reacting to the video presentation where they were making fun of QM making it sound like it’s just some silly math, but in reality it is the basis for a lot of common technology. Believe me, there wouldn’t be any giga-byte flash storage ICs if the silly math was off even a little. String theory does fit their description perhaps, and the multiverse, computer code etc is just theory, maybe just math fantasies. So if you want to lump all that into QM, some ridicule may be appropriate.

        QM is at the heart of the standard model of particle physics. Maxwell’s equations are perfectly fine when describing the behavior of a group of electrons (for example in a free electron laser) but at the particle level, the standard model has photons pushing electrons around and there isn’t any electric field. Each “field” whether it be from the strong force, electrical force, etc has a particle that transmits that force.

        I’m an engineer, not a physicist and will try to keep an open mind but it’s asking a lot.

        • optiongeek

          Tunneling is explained using classical laws. Consider a high jumper whose center of gravity passes below the bar yet he clears nonetheless. Any half-hearted attempt to defeat Mills’ theory will fail. He’s read QM and adjusted his theory over 25 years. In contrast, QM proponents haven’t read Mills.

          • Preston

            With QM the odds of that high jumper making a jump over a wall depends on the thickness of the wall. Consider two 20 foot tall steel walls, one is 1 foot thick, the other 1 inch thick. No chance for the jumper to make it over either wall, but with QM there is a chance – and the thinner wall lets lots more jumpers through.

          • optiongeek

            Have you read GUT-CP and how it explains statistical mechanics using purely classical laws? If not, then you are not really speaking with credibility when you say what is possible and what isn’t. Start with Chap. 24 in Vol 3 of the freely downloadable book.

            http://brilliantlightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/theory/GUT-CP-2016-Ed-Volume3-Web.pdf

    • Epi

      The entire semiconductor industry is build upon the physical effects described by quantum mechanics. But quantum mechanics is just a mathematical model, like all physics. Models are man made and are NOT reality. If we would find a mathematical/physical model that describes reality to 100% it would be more or less the prove that our universe is just a simulation that runs the equations we found. I highly doubt that.

      We do not know how many theorys are out there that correctly describe bose einstein condensates. And we do not know if GUTCP is capable of describing it correctly. But GUTCP has an explanation for high temperature superconductivity and QM has not.

      So I would suggest instead of being destructive and always point out what is hard to explain with GUTCP being constructive see what it is capable of (which is quite a lot) and put some time and effort into improving it.

      • Mark Underwood

        GUTCP accepts Bose’s and Einstein’s statistical prediction of such condensates.

    • optiongeek

      GUTCP provides the same solutions for all of the supposed successes of QM, and generally more accurate and more elegant.

    • tlp

      Not all of quantum mechanics is rejected, electrons have those quantum steps to excited states, those are physical facts. Many other things in quantum mechanics are not physical facts, and are now rejected when the real physical phenomenon are finally understood by Dr. Mills.

  • tlp

    Everybody should also watch this video (divided to two 40 minutes parts):
    http://www.brettholverstott.com/annoucements/2016/12/9/video-of-november-12th-talk

    Many questions presented in this and other BrLP threads are answered in this talk by Brett Holverstott, the author of this book:
    https://www.amazon.com/Randell-Mills-Search-Hydrino-Energy/dp/0692760059/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1481533791&sr=8-1&keywords=randell+mills

  • tlp

    Everybody should also watch this video (divided to two 40 minutes parts):
    http://www.brettholverstott.com/annoucements/2016/12/9/video-of-november-12th-talk

    Many questions presented in this and other BrLP threads are answered in this talk by Brett Holverstott, the author of this book:
    https://www.amazon.com/Randell-Mills-Search-Hydrino-Energy/dp/0692760059/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1481533791&sr=8-1&keywords=randell+mills

    • sam
    • Svein

      I wanted to hear this, but there was no sound?

      • tlp

        I have no problems with sound. Have you tried again?

    • Jay

      Holverstott writes an entire book about how the mainstream scientific community overlooks important scientific discoveries and maligns valid research, and then immediately throws rocks at cold fusion scientists calling their work discredited and debunked. His hypocrisy is simply off the charts.

      • doug marker

        Can you please quote Holverstott’s words rather than offer your interpretation of them. Leave the interpretation to us here. I heard the presentation and did *not* hear it the way you appear to be describing it in regard to ‘Cold Fusion’. Holverstott did point out the science community’s issue with the term after the Pons & Fleischman announcement event. Anyone who says that early announcement by P&F was not problematic is ignoring reality. Not quoting actual words leaves you open to accusations of emotional manipulation of the real meaning. Cheers D

        • Jay

          At about min 30 into the 2nd video where Holverstott mentions the “cold fusion fiasco” and uses the term “debunked” with regard to Fleischman and Pons’ work and why BLP isn’t taken seriously. Holverstott’s words not mine.

          Also in the first chapter of Holverstott’s book where he uses the terms “frivolous invention” and “scandal” to describe the 1989 “rise and fall” of cold fusion.

          Randell Mills also dismisses cold fusion as “impossible” in numerous places in his GUP theory.

          • doug marker

            Sorry but what Holverstott said (as you reported even though you appear to have deliberately cherry picked words rather than the whole quotes) is what most commentators say about the P&F event. How can *you* in any way justify your assertion of “His hypocrisy is simply off the charts.” – sorry but that is a rant not an intelligent comment. We learn nothing about Holverstott from it, just about your attitude to him and that is not shared by all others. D

  • Mark Underwood

    GUTCP accepts Bose’s and Einstein’s statistical prediction of such condensates.

  • Mark Underwood

    Close. The catalyst is water. Mills used water at the beginning, but after experimenting found that too much ‘old’ water had a quenching effect on hydrino formation. So he experimented instead with creating the water inside the cell, using various heat resistant oxides which would give up their oxygen to create a fresh, new water molecule (and then when the water was ionized during hydrino formation would take the oxygen back). Apparently one oxide worked particularly well, and that one he is keeping a secret.

    • Zephir

      The presence of argon and water in SunCell reactor is notoriously known too. Still no one attempted for the replication of its COP – at least in quite qualitative way.

      • Mark Underwood

        Argon will not be used inside the emissive carbon dome as far as I know. It will be used outside the dome, merely to provide pressure equalization.

        The amount of water generated inside the cell will be very small. So it really isn’t comparable to what you seem to have in mind with electrolytic cold fusion reactions.

        Right, no one has attempted replication of the SunCell COP. Not even BrLP has tested the COP of a working SunCell because it is not yet working! But if you are talking about the COP of the hydrino reaction itself (not within the SunCell), then yes that has been measured by bomb calorimetry. (BrLP brought in a specialist some months ago,who did the calorimetry work which was reported at one of their industry days.)

  • Job001

    Hydrinos are tiny per Mills with radius proportional to 1/p, so state p=4 is 1/4 ground state size and 64 fit into(cube for volume) a ground state atom volume.

  • Job001

    Hydrinos have a radius proportional to 1/p, so state p=4 is 1/4 ground state size per Mills so 64 fit into(cube for volume) a ground state atom volume. Likewise mean free path increases to the inverse of cross section to 16 times for p=4. Nickel has a diameter 5.4 times hydrogen ground state so 2,519 of the p=4 hydrinos would fit into the nickel atom volume.

    So, hydrinos would be highly penetrating with much longer mean free paths, enabling much easier escape from containers and container gas than ground state hydrogen molecules H2.

    Now, doesn’t that put another twist in the cats tail?

    • tlp

      What cat do you mean? It is true that hydrinos are very difficult to close inside any containers. But that is a good feature for SunCell, waste products just escape away conviniently.

      • Job001

        It is humor. People generally don’t know what a “twist in the cat’s tail” means. Likewise, few know atomic hydrinos are smaller, stable below ground state, and have much longer mean free paths and thus will escape much faster than atomic hydrogen and dramatically faster than molecular hydrogen H2.

  • Veblin

    Press Release
    Brilliant Light Power, Inc. Announces Today the Appointment of the Company’s Advisory Board
    December 13, 2016
    http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20161213005505/en
    http://brilliantlightpower.com/news-release-december-13-2016/

  • Mike Ivanov

    It seems like Mr. A. Rossi has solid competitor 🙂

    • Zephir

      Poor R. Mills could actually work for A.Rossi once it will turn out, that he maintains some form of cold fusion instead of hydrino formation – because on this fact all Mill’s patent are based. Once the Mill’s doesn’t utilize hydrino formation, then all his patents will lose their ground. Also cold fusion (20 MeV) is at least theoretically way more rich of energy, than the hydrino formation (327 eV max).

      • Bohem FromCz

        I think it is about 250 KeV (transition to p=137) !?

        • Zephir

          Actually Mills talks about 3.48 keV cutoff, but anyway – it’s still 1000-times less energy density than the fusion

          http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/Chapter-5_3.5_keV_feature.pdf

          • optiongeek

            In the recent demo, Mills spends a good deal of time discussing power density of SunCell vs nuclear. SunCell is much denser. A fusion reactor would be much larger than an equivalent SunCell, and much dirtier from all the contamination it would create.

          • Zephir

            Why not, but the power density is something else than the energy density. Even common coal boiler can have higher power density than nuclear reaction, but you wouldn’t use it for cosmic flight.

  • Zephir

    /* They don’t interact chemically with other atoms, or at least not in the same way as normal hydrogen,*/

    It shouldn’t be true even by Mills himself, who published many alleged compounds of said hydrinos. http://i.imgur.com/VW56zTz.jpg

    The more strange is, nobody else did ever see them, had been allowed to characterize them the more…

  • CWatters

    A 150kW array of photovoltaic cells is physically quite big….
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt7_1IdB0Cs

    • Epi

      The suncell is build with concentrator photovoltaic cells. So you use 1000-2000 times less space for the same amount of power.

  • jimbo92107

    All we need to see is one prototype that is undeniably operational. Some time in the next few months? Place yer bets. I’m betting on delay after delay, while they gather money from more suckers.

    I will say they’ve polished up their magic show quite a bit. What I’m wondering is why some universities don’t send hit squads of physics professors and engineers to shoot down these presentations.

    • optiongeek

      A few have tried, but they end up being converted if they study it too carefully. Dr. Jansson is one such academic.

  • Peter Wolstenholme

    CWatters – your example of a 150 kW array is not relevant. For many years, special P V arrays have been developed for super high intensity, say 1000 times that of normal sunlight, focussed on the PV cells by large mirrors, steered to point to the sun. 150 kW of that sort of PV cell is not huge in area, but needs very good cooling arrangements.

    Jimbo92107 – a good point. The scientific community prefers to not even look at ideas presented by Mills. The elephant in the room! They criticise Mills for not publishing in the top journals, while ensuring that the reviewers reject any attempt. We may see the situation evolving in the next year it two.

    Peter W.

    • MorganMck

      Agreed. If BrLP can just get their carbon-dome to around 3500 C and pull a reasonable amount of electric power from a CPV dome it will be very impressive even with jury-rigged cooling and primitive control system. If this can run for extended periods, I suspect the academics will start by offering alternatives to GUTCP to explain the phenomena (once fraud is ruled out).

  • MorganMck

    Agreed. If BrLP can just get their carbon-dome to around 3500 C and pull a reasonable amount of electric power from a CPV dome it will be very impressive even with jury-rigged cooling and primitive control system. If this can run for extended periods, I suspect the academics will start by offering alternatives to GUTCP to explain the phenomena (once fraud is ruled out).

  • Nicholas Payne

    I guess the quantum mechanics question comes down to this. Given that an electron rotating around a nucleus will quickly give up its energy, since an electric and magnetic field rotates with it and will jostle other charged particles which takes energy, quantum mechanics says that the arrangement is stable because the electron can only give up energy one quantum at a time. But the rotating fields and the jostling still exist, so where does the energy come from?

  • Jas

    I watched the Dec 16th presentation in London. Pretty much the same as the DC one. I need to have a moan though. At the end of the presentation when you get the questions from the guests, you cant hear what they are asking. Subtitles would be great. It would also be nice to see a shot from the back of the room to see how many persons are present. I wonder if some of the guests want to remain secret?

    • MorganMck

      I listened to the Q&A in hopes of getting more info. than in DC. Someone asked about prototype timing and Mills said he thought they would have a CPV integrated Geo-dome working in the March ’17 time frame. If this could produce substantial power for extended periods, I would think BrLP will start to get a lot of attention.

  • Zephir

    Why not, but the power density is something else than the energy density. Even common coal boiler can have higher power density than nuclear reaction, but you wouldn’t use it for cosmic flight.

  • doug marker

    Can you please quote Holverstott’s words rather than offer your interpretation of them. Leave the interpretation to us here. I heard the presentation and did *not* hear it the way you appear to be describing it in regard to ‘Cold Fusion’. Holverstott did point out the science community’s issue with the term after the Pons & Fleischman announcement event. Anyone who says that early announcement by P&F was not problematic is ignoring reality. Not quoting actual words leaves you open to accusations of emotional manipulation of the real meaning. Cheers D

  • doug marker

    Sorry but what Holverstott said (as you finally quoted so we could see) is what most commentators say about the P&F event. How can *you* in any way justify your assertion of “His hypocrisy is simply off the charts.” – sorry but that is a rant not an intelligent comment. We learn nothing about Holverstott from it, just about your attitude to him and that is not shared by all others. D