New Developments at Brilliant Light Power (Video)

Does anyone have any information on independent observations of hydrinos? I once saw a blurb on phys.org about this but can not find it now.
This round of experiments seems to be based on -> store energy for a while, then pow pow pow. The rest seems like nit picking the math to get the 'correct answer'.

R, Mills has alway asserted that the energy that he sees in his experiments were based on CHEMICAL processes which are driven by the particular characteristics of the hydrino theory. There always has been a correspondence between the small amount of energy produced by LENR experiments and the small amounts of energy produced by hydrinos.

In this latest SunCell experiment, R. Mills is seeing huge quantities of excess power produced in these reactor meltdowns, in the megawatt range. There is no way that such huge amounts of power can be produced by chemical means. This implies that the hydrino is no longer the cause of the excess energy seen in these meltdowns. Something else is going on. Mills must now explain where all this energy is coming from if it cannot be produced by chemical reactions. X-rays are being generated with energies far in excess of any electrical input voltages. What produces these X-rays?

BLP states:

Quote

Proof of a new energy source is provided by two otherwise inexplicable observations: (i) The formation of a high-energy hydrogen plasma in the absence of any input electrical power, the nonexistence of any energy releasing chemistry with this fuel, and the further impossibility of known chemistry of this high energy. (ii) The emission of soft X-ray radiation at a voltage far less than that of the light energy produced and the inability of any known chemistry to release such high energy.

The meltdowns that are now occurring in the SunCell where the tungsten electrodes are being vaporized in a high powered reaction might be solved through the use of a liquid or plasma based electrode. Ken Shoulders used this concept in his equipment to minimize the wear and tear on his equipment.

Two streams of liquid metal formed under high pressure, one being the anode and the other being the cathode could be directed at each other each carrying a low voltage high amperage electric current. These two streams could be made to contact each other where a low voltage high current electric arc would occur. These liquid electrodes would constantly reconstitute themselves after the production of a megawatt level explosion.

Quote from Shane D.

Briian Ahern has been ripping into LENR+ recently. It appears he had Rossi pegged for what he is, but yesterday on EGOOUT he also dispatched BLP, and BE in one fell swoop:

Brian AhernJune 17, 2016 at 5:30 AM

Plasma electrolysis is a nice'parlor trick'. I did it thoroughly in 2007. The glowing electrode is asymmetric. It is only sumersed about 5 mm. This amplifies the electrical field to induce breakdown. The plamsa is just a seies of individaul discharges. There is no excess energy.

It is very hard to accurately measure the input power from the wall and it often appears to be over unity.

Brillouin has been making this mistake for over 5 years and they never measure the wall plug power.

Not much, if anything left of commercial value if he is right. Maybe Miley or Piantelli? Sure is not going to look good when the DOD reports to congress this fall, and says the field is filled mostly with charlatans, or incompetents that haven't figured out yet, after their many years existence, that they are measuring wrong.

By the way, those are the same type accusations leveled at the LENR side of the field that Brian represents, going back to 1989. He has stated though, that the skeps are wrong, and that LENR is real...wonder what he is referring to?

Display More

This is a valid viewpoint when the output level from these reactions are low, but when the levels are in the megawatt range and the COPs are in the hundreds, then evaluation of the reactions become more clear cut and unambiguous. Brian has never produced a powerful reaction, so his opinion about these types of reactions are not well informed.

Now, Mills gives us a chance to evaluate a robust reaction since Mills is open with his descriptions of his technolgy.

Quote from Shane D.

Briian Ahern has been ripping into LENR+ recently. It appears he had Rossi pegged for what he is, but yesterday on EGOOUT he also dispatched BLP, and BE in one fell swoop:

Brian AhernJune 17, 2016 at 5:30 AM

Plasma electrolysis is a nice'parlor trick'. I did it thoroughly in 2007. The glowing electrode is asymmetric. It is only sumersed about 5 mm. This amplifies the electrical field to induce breakdown. The plamsa is just a seies of individaul discharges. There is no excess energy.

It is very hard to accurately measure the input power from the wall and it often appears to be over unity.

Brillouin has been making this mistake for over 5 years and they never measure the wall plug power.

Not much, if anything left of commercial value if he is right. Maybe Miley or Piantelli? Sure is not going to look good when the DOD reports to congress this fall, and says the field is filled mostly with charlatans, or incompetents that haven't figured out yet, after their many years existence, that they are measuring wrong.

By the way, those are the same type accusations leveled at the LENR side of the field that Brian represents, going back to 1989. He has stated though, that the skeps are wrong, and that LENR is real...wonder what he is referring to?

Display More

Sadly, Brian is probably right about BLP and Brillouin. I have long suspected that measurement of input power is where Godes could have gone wrong. Probably aided by the fact that being an electrical engineer makes him overly confident about such measures. It is very difficult to correctly measure input power with such a high voltage / high power short pulses (e.g., <100ns). Until Godes measures at the wall socket, it can't be believed. I have never found BLP believable. That doesn't mean they have nothing, but Mills really doesn't seem to understand or deliberately distorts engineering challenges. A frequent thing he does is takes a small measurement and using calculations, scales it up to a massive scale. Then he doesn't figure it will be too hard to scale up and commercialize (or at least continuously presents this absurd evaluation). As it is, they are simply providing anecdotal evidence by saying that there have been these several third party validations. Where is the data and reports?

Maybe there is something left to the field with Storms and basic science, Letts, Cravens, and Miley.

Quote from axil

R, Mills has alway asserted that the energy that he sees in his experiments were based on CHEMICAL processes which are driven by the particular characteristics of the hydrino theory.

This statement is completely wrong! Mills never asserted a chemical reason. Hydrino is just a synonym for lower H orbitals - below the Plank level. Even Holmlid confirmed the deep H*/D* level at around -630eV (below Plank level). The theory behind this is no fancy stuff and goes back to Sommerfeld and even farther.

Mills theory assumes there are 137 “negative” undistorted energy levels. But with such an assumption it is not possible to mathematically construct a (simple) statistic. This would only work if there is a hidden multi body process.

Mills could reasonably prove (and publish) the existence of chemical stable H*-3. But there are no reproductions so far, because most people ignore his work.

Quote from Shane D.

Plasma electrolysis is a nice'parlor trick'. I did it thoroughly in 2007. The glowing electrode is asymmetric. It is only sumersed about 5 mm. This amplifies the electrical field to induce breakdown. The plamsa is just a seies of individaul discharges. There is no excess energy. It is very hard to accurately measure the input power from the wall and it often appears to be over unity.

If I decode the above post “rightly” then the author claims there was never successful Plasma electrolysis. The truth is: Only a few people managed to produce a COP >1. This COP was not produced as extra heat it goes into excess H₂ gas production. This experiment is very challenging.

Quote from Shane D.

Been following it for 5 1/2 years now, and all I see is exactly what the skeptics have claimed all along...it has all the hallmarks of a "pseudoscience"? Bunch of garage tinkerers, dreamers, and retirees chasing artifacts it seems.

The BLP Process is very simple. Mills usually charges some xFarad super-caps and releases the energy in a very high current with more than 10'000 amps. The voltage is not higher than 5V. The energy pumped (less than 10 times a second) into the system can be measured very easily by multiplying the “shot frequency” with the energy it takes to load the cap's. There are no issues with sparky power-supplies etc..
His COP's, which were independently confirmed, were never very high (1-10). Further on his process could never run for a reasonably long time, because the LENR reaction happened in the electrodes which eroded more or less fast.

What I can see from his clip is that he now can burn down the electrode much faster. May be he found a sweet spot, which allowed a much higher COP. (This sweet spot has also been reported by others with similar approaches.)

There are a few independent reports publish by BrLP but they are old and I can't find a reference of a COP > 100 in them. I'm not sure that Mills refer to these studies when he refer to the validation reports in the text of the VIdeo. I do remember from the last demo that he expressed a will not to prove to the world what he has. He seam to want to stay under the radar with a good stream of funding and improve the concept.

To the remark that he did small experiments and extrapolated those a bit too optimistic. Yes up-scaling is ńever easy. And I don't trust him saying that it is a simple matter too develop xxx. But today he do have managed to upscale so in the initial calculations was not too bad as a tool for projection.

Quote from Shane D.

May I ask, is there a reason for me to follow LENR anymore? Any possibility this may come to something significant? Been following it for 5 1/2 years now, and all I see is exactly what the skeptics have claimed all along...it has all the hallmarks of a "pseudoscience"? Bunch of garage tinkerers, dreamers, and retirees chasing artifacts it seems.

Want to believe, trust me...but starting to wonder.

Shane,

The work of many of the garage tinkerers, has actually been open, scientific and objective. Of course there are exceptions. It has not all been a loss since some very impressive methodologies have been developed in garages. Look at what Brian Albiston, Russ Gries, and Jeff Morriss were able to do. MFMP has made tremendous contributions experimentally (as long as certain pronouncements are ignored). Alan Smith and Sam have poured countless hours, skill, and creativity into their efforts with lookingforheat.com. I'm sure I'm forgetting some.

I would keep an eye on the field for developments, but I would probably put more energy into technologies that are developing and known to work (e.g., conventional technologies like solar and wind). I too hope there is something to CF other than artifact and error. I would keep an open mind, but not excessively open.

@Wyttenbach
Thanks for the long explanation of Mills theory. But their might be a way to delineate how the blue light is produced in the experiments that all those hydrino validators see in their experiments.

I say that the blue light comes from polaritons. This polariton origin of the blue light can be verified because the light is coherent and will show the Mollow triplet in its spectral lines. Polaritons produce laser light and any atom that is irradiated using laser light will show a Mollow triplet.

Dressed in the picture means a two level system irradiated with a laser,

The same test can be applied to the blue light that Rossi is generating in the QuarkX. Rossi is producing coherent laser light generated by polaritons. . The blue light produced in sonoluminescence will also show this polariton coherent spectral signature.

The photons in a nanocavity act as an artificial atom that displays this below ground state behavior in the production of photo phosphorescence.

This is a prediction from theory which asserts that polaritons are the causative mechanism in the LENR mechanism including what Mills has been seeing over all these years.

Holmlid is generating hydrogen Coulombic Crystals where the hydrogen is metalized. This means that the protons are in a lattice configuration and the electrons are delocalized around the core of the proton lattice. Here too, the hydrogen Coulombic Crystal is coherent and forms a BEC.

It would be great if someone at the June 28th demonstration could ask Mills directly about Ahern's assertion. If I were an investor sitting in that room at this point I would want to see Mills clearly demonstrate that the SunCell is an overunity device. There really is no reason to delay a clear demonstration of that at this point, unless the SunCell is not an over unity device.

If the SunCell can run continuously (which Mills now says it can) it should not be that difficult to clearly see it. We are past the millisecond reaction phase. Mills is saying that he will have a unit out in the field next year (yes, for the 10th time I know). But he has to know that he is on thin ice with his investors. His willingness to do demonstrations in front of them and putting them online is miles ahead of what AR did with is fuzzy blue light photo.

Quote from Jack Cole

Quote from Shane D.: “Briian Ahern has been ripping into LENR+ recently. It appears he had Rossi pegged for what he is, but yesterday on EGOOUT he also dispatched BLP, and BE in one fell swoop:

Brian AhernJune 17, 2016 at 5:30 AM

Plasma electrolysis…

Jack,
These are a lot of negative statements for someone who has no actual information. Also, Brian has made a number of absurd comments in the recent past, which were clearly wrong.

However, regarding the question of input power in BLP's experiments, as well as your comment about the input power in Godes' machines, I think that these are certainly good points to raise - although it doesn't make them correct.

In fact, regarding Godes' experiments I raised it with McKubre several years ago (since SRI has been participating in the testing of Brillouin Energy's device). However, he assured me that measuring the input power accurately was not a problem. I might add that Claytor has used Godes' "prescription" and produced tritium, which is a clear sign of LENR.

Getting back to the input power issue, I certainly don't know if either BLP or Brillouin Energy have been measuring it correctly (and/or using "wall-plug power" to make sure) but I would guess that since (a) BLP claims multiple different confirmations and/or evaluations (and also since they are claiming energy gains of 1000 which seems unlikely to be due entirely to measurement error) and (b) since SRI has worked with Brillouin and tested their devices for several years with top scientists and engineers, then there is a reasonable possibility that their results are not entirely due to errors in measuring the input power. However - unlike many on this forum - and Brian Ahern - I retain an open mind, and am waiting to hear more evidence either way.

Quote from Shane D.

Briian Ahern has been ripping into LENR+ recently. It appears he had Rossi pegged for what he is, but yesterday on EGOOUT he also dispatched BLP, and BE in one fell swoop:

<i>Brian AhernJune 17, 2016 at 5:30 AM

Plasma electrolysis is a nice'parlor trick'.</i>…

Shane D. wrote: "Not much, if anything left of commercial value if he is right. Maybe Miley or Piantelli? Sure is not going to look good when the DOD reports to congress this fall, and says the field is filled mostly with charlatans, or incompetents that haven't figured out yet, after their many years existence, that they are measuring wrong. By the way, those are the same type accusations leveled at the LENR side of the field that Brian represents, going back to 1989. He has stated though, that the skeps are wrong, and that LENR is real...wonder what he is referring to?"

Spoken like a true skeptopath.

Quote from axil

In this latest SunCell experiment, R. Mills is seeing huge quantities of excess power produced in these reactor meltdowns, in the megawatt range. There is no way that such huge amounts of power can be produced by chemical means.

Wrong. It is quite simple to build a capacitive device which will hold charge at thousands of volts and can be discharged in far under a microsecond (for example a Blumlein, and many many other pulse generators). Peak currents in such a discharge can be thousands of amperes. Such brief discharges can easily reach gigawatt peak powers from any source of charging power, chemical, solar, bicycle generator, wall plug, you name it...

To a first order of approximation:

one joule of energy fully discharged in a microsecond is one megawatt average power
one joule of energy fully discharged in a nanosecond is one gigawatt average power

Your average hamburger contains many thousands of joules of chemical energy.

Quote from Longview

Wrong. It is quite simple to build a capacitive device which will hold charge at thousands of volts and can be discharged in far under a microsecond (for example a Blumlein, and many many other pulse generators). Peak currents in such a discharge can be thousand of amperes. Such brief discharges can easily reach gigawatt peak powers from any source of charging power, chemical, solar, bicycle generator, wall plug, you name it...

To a first order of approximation:

one joule of energy fully discharged in a microsecond is one megawatt average power
one joule of energy fully discharged in a nanosecond is one gigawatt average power

Your average hamburger contains many thousands of joules of chemical energy.

Display More

It is Mills contention, that the low voltage arc is active for only a short time while the plasma is gainful for a long time.

Quote

High-speed (17,791 frames per second) photography of brilliant light-emitting expanding plasma formed from the low voltage, high current detonation of the solid fuel with voltage and current waveforms that show plasma at a time when there was no electrical input power (noted by the yellow vertical line) for a fuel having no known energy-releasing chemical reaction. The plasma persisted for 21.9 ms while the input power was zero at 1.275 ms. The peak reactive voltage measured at the welder connection to the bus bar was about 20 V, and the corresponding voltage at the other end near the fuel was <15 V. Proof of a new energy source is provided by two otherwise inexplicable observations: (i) The formation of a high-energy hydrogen plasma in the absence of any input electrical power, the nonexistence of any energy releasing chemistry with this fuel, and the further impossibility of known chemistry of this high energy. (ii) The emission of soft X-ray radiation at a voltage far less than that of the light energy produced and the inability of any known chemistry to release such high energy.

Apparently quoting Mills:

Quote from axil

(ii) The emission of soft X-ray radiation at a voltage far less than that of the light energy produced and the inability of any known chemistry to release such high energy.

Similarly, but less dramatic than my previous example, a 20 volt charge discharged in a few microseconds can yield millions of watts peak power. Further, any welding operation at whatever voltage, produces lots of UV, including some XUV and soft X-rays. My understanding is that this is due to the Boltzmann distribution of thermal photons from a 6000 K arc in air, in metallic ions, in inert gases used to shield, in welding flux constituents. More speculatively, electrons and possible protons conducted through the arc may participate for all I know, along with atomic hydrogen and other hydrogen species, in other transient reactions producing an array of photonic and potentially nucleonic products, if the circumstances allow and if measurements were readily refined to properly look.

Another mundane example: Fluorescent lamps, especially longer ones are known to produce soft x-rays near the ends, where accelerated electrons can impact the tungsten filament for example. That is say a 60 watt 120 vac fluorescent bulb of two meters length. Electrons having thermal energy spectrum are also free to drift in the AC potential field of the tube, depending on the density of gases therein, reaching some fraction of the local charge differentials they may pass through. Dozens of electron volts may be seen statistically. Giving yet another source for soft bremstrahlung at the filaments, reaching a wavelength as short as 10 nm (124 eV).