Transitioning to the Future (Tom Whipple)

  • [feedquote='E-Cat World','http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/10/29/transitioning-to-the-future-tom-whipple/']The following post has been submitted by Tom Whipple Last Wednesday I had what may turn out to be a glimpse of mankind’s future in, of all places, New Jersey. Keep in mind that New Jersey was where Edison invented the light bulb, so the state has a track record of earth-shaking innovation. The venue […][/feedquote]
  • Whipple also wrote another post approved by Acland, http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…ry-day-event-tom-whipple/


    Some excerpts from the first report:


    Quote

    BLP has formed outside advisory committees and is clearly planning to be ready to market SunCells by the end of 2017 or soon thereafter — if all goes well.
    [...]
    Mills seems to have gotten by the electrode melting problem with a very elegant solution involving two charged streams of silver and now has prototypes running in his labs for long periods. They are shut off at night. As there are no moving parts, he sees no reliability problems. They have designed these things to run non-stop for 20 years.


    One small problem. Mills has been announcing "ready for market next year" for how long? I first started watching in 2009 and that was claimed then. I think it goes back further than that. What happened? His technology has radically changed since then. The original approach, allegedly confirmed, disappeared.


    Quote

    The schedule calls for the first test of the SunCell with photo voltaic cells and electrical output in January.


    Photovolatic cells are available for immediate delivery. The delay is from, allegedly, needing to make the cells be a particular size, to fit together to most efficiently capture the light. However, supposedly there is plenty of power. A lower efficiency prototype would still work. If Mills can demonstrate major power production in a way that can be independently verified, he could very easily raise enormous investment. But Mills goes his own way, he is in firm control. Sound familiar?


    Quote

    The transparency of BLP is orders of magnitude above Rossi. BLP is keeping a few details of the silver/hydroxide mixture secret and say the exact mixture is very sensitive to making a good “sun”.


    If it is crucial and secret, it can't be patented, unless the secret is revealed. However, if he is as close to market as he claims, there would be no more reason to keep it secret. He'd file the patent and make sure that devices are being tested independently -- before the patent office could reject the patent as impossible, I think he's had that difficulty. Patent refusal on "impossibility" was actually a deviant practice and might be gone, but there were also always ways around it. Maybe Mills is more transparent than Rossi, but "orders of magnitude" implies a hundred times more transparent, at a minimum, and that's ridiculous. This is a secret invention, still, unverifiable independently, so far.


    Quote

    In sum, Mills seems to be making good progress. After seeing who was in the audience, etc etc. I have trouble believing that Mills and his verifiers, who were there and talked about their findings, are not telling the truth. it seems clear to me that we will have to rewrite the Quantum Mechanics text books someday — about the time Mills gets his Nobel for the the greatest advance in Physics since relativity.


    Whipple is having difficulty "believing that [some] are not telling the truth" because he lives in a black and white world, and he has a contrary belief, rather obviously, that Mills is disclosing the whole "truth," whatever that is. Mills is claiming that mainstream physics is essentially wrong. I have no difficulty accepting that "below-ground" electron orbits might be possible. However, it opens cans of worms, and it is an extraordinary claim, and there is a middle ground, normal in science, between "believing" a claim and considering it "not telling the truth," i.e., lying. It is simple skepticism, that doesn't believe extraordinary claims without, at least, ordinary proof! And if some are looking for extraordinary proof, that's their right.


    Quote

    All I can do for now is to suggest that you take a careful look at whatever gets posted about this on the BLP website. I hope this helps your thinking about where all this is going. I hate to say this, but electricity produced from water (extracted from the atmosphere) seems to be a better potential seller than a heat-producing QuarkX.


    Comparing two unobtainable products may interest some, but not me.


    there was a comment there.


    Quote

    Phillip Power tlp • 18 hours ago
    Yes and this is the surely most fundamental point that mainstream science should be commenting on. If Mills really has achieved net energy production from his device, it shouldn't matter to SCIENCE whether that net energy is not yet in a convenient form, such as electricity. It does obviously matter to the world of technology and green energy but NOT to science itself.


    He is correct, but there is a condition here that has not been communicated to the mainstream, in language that the mainstream will understand, and, in fact, the condition may not exist. "If ..." and if the production is not some artifact.


    I will say that Mills has created a truly spectacular outreach video, where the reaction starts up and the screen goes green and then white from the intense light and a voice is heard, "Oh My God! Turn it off!" However, what did it lead to? Hours of boring fluff that I was not going to waste time watching.


    Quote

    The skeptics, led by Robert Park, only seem to have two arguments against Mills - that the SunCell violates the "laws" of physics and that it is not yet a commercial device. While the latter argument is by far the weaker one, a successful commercial launch of the SunCell will obviously have implications far beyond the introduction of "yet another energy generation device" as some of the more sleepy MSM may, at first, describe it. Park will know better and he and his fellow "spin surgeons" will have to start "scrubbing up" urgently. That promises to be hilarious in itself.


    There are those who will spend a lot of time "debunking" what they think is wrong. The SunCell -- and the whole hydrino theory -- is radically unexpected. There are no "laws of physics," technically, but there are relationships that are known to work with very high precision and confirmation. The mainstream is not about to toss those out without strong evidence.


    I am working on outreach for LENR, and the first goal is to create new published research that is conclusive, that is itself clearly confirmation of what has been found before. This is building solid ground, that already existed for those who would invest the huge effort needed to understand existing research, but making it more accessible from something relatively simple. easily understood, and packaged where they might be more likely to see it.


    Mills, if it were his goal, and if his discoveries are real, could have broken through those barriers long ago. My own conclusion is that it's likely deceptive, and not merely error. I don't consider that proven, and it is merely my personal assessment from a whole lot of looking at Mills' claims over many, many years. He is completely welcome to demolish this with independently verifiable evidence. So far, no cigar. As Rossi correctly claims, the market is the ultimate judge.

  • I think that the BLP effect is real, but the SunCell is more or less a large, complex Rube Goldberg device. Even if it does produce some level of excess energy, the device isn't practical for mass production and will require long and exhaustive improvements.

  • So, now, this new post:
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…o-the-future-tom-whipple/


    Quote

    Keep in mind that New Jersey was where Edison invented the light bulb, so the state has a track record of earth-shaking innovation.


    I'll try to keep that in mind. I don't recall the earth shaking when Edison invented the light bulb, however. Did it? True, it was before I was born, but just how did light bulbs shake the earth? Ah, mysteries abound. If it says so on the internet, it must be true.


    Quote

    If your immediate reaction is that this sounds too good to be true, welcome to the club as 99+ percent of people who have ever heard about this device have the same reaction as you — at least for now. The issue is not that the SunCell does not work, for all those who have been close enough to see it in operation or tested its output testify that it does; the problem is that the device and the science behind it are simply too far ahead of our time to be comprehended. As the late Arthur C. Clarke, the science fiction writer, said, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”


    Indeed. Therefore it must be true. This is fairly obvious. The "SunCell" does something. I don't think that video was fake. It actually generated a lot of light. As to "testing its output," who has done that, specifically, and under what conditions? Is there any truly independent examination that can be trusted? Something that would motivate a skeptic to spend time looking at the evidence?


    Quote

    Starting from the development in November 2013 of a process to extract large amounts of energy from atomic hydrogen derived from water molecules, Randell Mills and his associates at Brilliant Light Power have moved the technology from a single flash of light to a device that now can keep a teacup-sized version of the sun burning continuously inside a sphere made of refractory materials.


    There is no refractory material that can withstand solar temperatures, so this is hype from Mills. And Mills was announcing hydrino power long before 2013, ready for market very soon, and claiming independent validation and sales, etc.


    Quote

    Needless to say, we can anticipate a strong vested-interest reaction to the advent of this technology from those involved in the various way we currently produce and distribute electricity.


    They will probably hire hordes of trolls to debunk it on the internet. Everyone knows that this is what terrified mainstream investors and scientists do. Right?


    Quote

    What are we to think about all this? First, the possibility that the whole idea is a scam is too remote to consider.


    Or too horrible to contemplate. Don't even think "scam"! If the idea comes to mind, think about bunnies, children with cancer, or Andrea Rossi. After all, the possibility of an inventor making false claims about his product is so remote that it can be discounted, it has not happened, ever. Of course, the world has conspired to suppress inventions like the Keely Motor, the Papp Engine and,, of course, Andrea Rossi's E-cat.


    If there was an E-cat installed in everyone's house -- or a SunCell -- these idiots would still be breathing sand. "Impossible! Impossible! Impossible!" Meanwhile the rest of us smart people will be enjoying the benefits, free energy and the sheer joy of Being Right, even though all those idiots were telling us that we were gullible as hell.


    (By the way, this commentary is not intended to equate Keely, Papp, or Rossi. Keely was almost certainly fraud, Papp was mysterious and, ah, eccentric and there is plenty of reason for high suspicion of fraud, but it is hard to tell when someone is so frikkin' schizophrenic, and Rossi, well, let's say the jury is out. The real point is that a lot of people are ready to believe in something because ... because .... uh, because why? Call it faith, faith is not a bad thing, unless ... unless .... unless what? Unless maybe you invest your life savings and, ah, get nothing back. That would be a bit disappointing, eh, but it's only money. This is true: I'd rather live a life with faith and no money, than money and no faith. However, that doesn't seem to be the choice I actually have.)


    Whipple refers to many reasons to believe the technology is real. All are circumstantial, but he does not provide any links or backup. If Mills is a customer of a company making solar cells, and has made a substantial deposit to cover necessary engineering, that company is not going to look at his technology and go over it with a fine-tooth comb. No, the response will be, "Thanks for the order. You want me to talk about our product? Sure. Any time. Where?"

  • Whipple believes just about any energy device claim. He's a complete woowoo despite some decent credentials. I warned him about Rossi as far back as 2013 in copious details, via (IIRC) his Youtube channel. Again, IIRC, he censors out all dissenting replies to his articles. I may be recalling that wrong but I doubt it.


    Abd about Whipple about Mills (corrected as per Abd)

    Quote

    First, the possibility that the whole idea is a scam is too remote to consider.

    That it doesn't work is a virtual certainty given the history, the silliness of the idiotic demo, and so on. Whether it is a scam or self-delusion on the part of Mills, it's hard to say. My first choice is scam. It's been going too long and it has been too elaborate and expensive to be a self delusion. But it's hard to be certain. Suncell, shmushcell.

  • Photovolatic cells are available for immediate delivery.


    Mill's needs three band PV convertors with a peak in the XUV region, that run for more than 12 hours day time they are originally designed for. Additionally they must be - to some extent - radiation hard and highly coolable.


    Mills is claiming that mainstream physics is essentially wrong.


    The usual distortion, Correct: Mainstream physics is essentially claiming that Mill's is wrong!


    Mills, if it were his goal, and if his discoveries are real, could have broken through those barriers long ago. My own conclusion is that it's likely deceptive, and not merely error. I don't consider that proven, and it is merely my personal assessment from a whole lot of looking at Mills' claims over many, many years. He is completely welcome to demolish this with independently verifiable evidence. So far, no cigar. As Rossi correctly claims, the market is the ultimate judge.


    True: He (R.Mills) is (was) the only seriously researching person (one new is Holmlid!) in science & engineering that believes that low H(-x) orbits are important and really do exist. Whether his theory is correct or not, is not important for his business success. This might be also the reason, why he hides some information, because earlier patents did build on his hydrino theory...


  • Abd about Mills


    That it doesn't work is a virtual certainty given the history, the silliness of the idiotic demo, and so on. Whether it is a scam or self-delusion on the part of Mills, it's hard to say. My first choice is scam. It's been going too long and it has been too elaborate and expensive to be a self delusion. But it's hard to be certain. Suncell, shmushcell.

    Ah, Mary, that was not me about Mills, that was me quoting Whipple about Mills, and I then took the piss out of it. Please be careful about your attributions, you could make it look like I was pooh-poohing the idea that Mills is a fraud, when it is obviously on the table. Please correct your post to make it clear, perhaps attribute the quote to Whipple, not me.