Hi, Alain. Look, brilliant ligth power will hold a meeting today.
Should we create a dedicated thread to that ?
-
-
I think this will be a meeting mainly attended by bankers and hedgies. That at least is BLP's desired audience profile. If any interesting info should emerge, I am sure there will be room for it in this thread.
-
Done. to create thread, go to the forum, and click on the top button (* New Thread )
-
I think this will be a meeting mainly attended by bankers and hedgies. That at least is BLP's desired audience profile. If any interesting info should emerge, I am sure there will be room for it in this thread.
...so can we expect to see such a horror show like it was with orbo/steorn ?
-
...so can we expect to see such a horror show like it was with orbo/steorn ?
BrLP shows so far have been nothing like Orbo/Steorn. At the Oct 26th, the world was introduced to the first ever terrestrially-situated plasma that sustained itself without an input current source. That's Nobel Prize winning stuff on it's own (see video at time mark 4' 30"). However, Mills has said the roadshow will not introduce new demos. Instead, he's called out late January for a press conference.External Content www.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy. -
When ignition is off, is no power going into the cell? Why is ignition turned on later in the video?
It is difficult to understand what is being displayed. Is the plasma the white light or the orange streamer? -
When ignition is off, is no power going into the cell? Why is ignition turned on later in the video?
It is difficult to understand what is being displayed. Is the plasma the white light or the orange streamer?
Perhaps someone would want to go over what BLP has released on this and create a description. My understanding is that the streamer is liquid silver, being used as a conductor. It's obviously not a plasma, you can see that it's a liquid. -
So far, for more than 20 years, BLP has been promising power plants and not delivering anything to anybody. Their experiments are meaningless except to enthusiasts and perhaps themselves. They are very much like Defkalion, Rossi and Steorn.
-
Perhaps someone would want to go over what BLP has released on this and create a description. My understanding is that the streamer is liquid silver, being used as a conductor. It's obviously not a plasma, you can see that it's a liquid.
The intersecting molten liquid silver streams are the electrodes carrying the approximately 10kA current required for the reaction. The fuel is simply H diffused into the chamber as H2 gas, and the HOH catalyst required by the reaction is provided a "very stable" source oxide mixed into the stream. The product is H[1/4]_2 (dihydrino gas), which escapes from the reaction chamber and through the atmosphere into space.The reaction causes the vessel to heat up to approximately 3000C with 10 atmospheres of pressure from silver vapor. At some point (i.e. 4' 30") the reaction becomes self-sustaining and the input current is withdrawn. A minute or so later, the reaction has cooled enough that the ignition current is needed again. Four independent experts have reported out over 2MW is provided in steady state from this reaction, at over 500x gain (obviously infinite gain when the current is shut off). Mills has reported that the device can run all day, but due the current lack of controls currently requires constant manual attention to operate (see below).
As commented on by folks with decades of plasma experience, a self-sustaining plasma is simply unknown to science outside of the Sun. A source of charge species is *always* required to maintain the plasma and these particles will diffuse to ground in milliseconds once the input current is turned off, killing the plasma. So I stand by my assertion that BrLP demos have shown Nobel-prize winning phenomena.
Mills has been very open about the remaining engineering before his field test unit is ready. First, the vessel is still operating in "open" mode, inside a pressurized glove box. This is because he lacks the necessary control systems to regulate the flow of molten silver effectively and therefore it must be done by hand. He has said the control components are being developed now. Second, the Concentrator Photovoltaic units are still being developed by his partner - Masimo. The first version of these are due next month. As I mentioned, he's planning a press conference at the end of January. Perhaps we'll see a fully functioning field test unit in operation.
-
So far, for more than 20 years, BLP has been promising power plants and not delivering anything to anybody. Their experiments are meaningless except to enthusiasts and perhaps themselves. They are very much like Defkalion, Rossi and Steorn.
I'll make sure to let BrLP's development partners (including at least one prominent utility provider) know about your concerns. Perhaps you can contact the firm that is fabricating the prototype equipment yourself and warn them. Columbia Tech's CTO is John DeCarlo, I'm sure he'd love to hear from you. -
It is very difficult from the video to tell what is happening as everything is saturated. Would a neutral density filter help i.e. what do you see visually with welders goggles? I cannot tell if the plasma is present or not. I agree that turning off current should shut down a plasma immediately except if the temperature is high enough. In a flame, you create charged particles as it is the basis of a flame ionization detector. You will also have charged species due to photoionization of the silver clusters. The thermal ionization would not stop immediately but the photoionization should.
In general the data where it needs reactivation because the system cools is inconsistent with a plasma being maintained and energy being produced continuously. What happen to an AM radio near this system? A plasma will emit copious RF.
-
Quote from Mary Yugo: “So far, for more than 20 years, BLP has been promising power plants and not delivering anything to anybody. Their experiments are meaningless except to enthusiasts and perhaps themselves. They are very much like Defkalion, Rossi…
Mary is a special case. She belongs to LENR inventory and we have to love her the way she is
. -
Yeah. Let her be. She's.... different.
-
Apparently the careful folks at EarthTech are "different" also. They carefully followed Mills' instructions and got... no excess power.
http://earthtech.org/experiments/blp/HiFi/Run5/Run5.html
QuoteI'll make sure to let BrLP's development partners (including at least one prominent utility provider) know about your concerns. Perhaps you can contact the firm that is fabricating the prototype equipment yourself and warn them. Columbia Tech's CTO is John DeCarlo, I'm sure he'd love to hear from you.
Well, some people in the past who heard from me and did not invest in Defkalion were happy I warned them. Possibly some who would have invested in Rossi as well. WTF is Columbia Tech? Do they have a link or web page about their Mills related work?
I'm hardly unique in my bad opinion of Mills and his claims. See also (that's not me, it's Forbes):
QuoteThis case has many things in common with other failed new energy technologies, including a charismatic leader who generates lots of press, claims of academic validation and criticism of expert skepticism, ample fundraising, and frequent reports of interest from potential buyers. What you don’t find are actual ongoing operation of a power plant outside of demonstration models controlled by the promoter.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mi…that-stupid/#446e46d94d46
and: http://hoaxes.org/weblog/comme…klight_power_and_hydrinos and comments
and: http://goodmath.scientopia.org…date-in-the-hydrino-saga/
-
A comment at the goodmath site I previously linked:
QuoteDisplay MoreMarkCC
January 22, 2014 at 2:01 pm
If energy density is just a guise to conceal the real issues, then why go to such trouble to obfuscate? Why ignore all of the points I made in this post, in favor of just whining and attacking me?The fact is, Mill's GUTCP is a pile of garbage. It's not even a good fake; it's just nonsense. Blacklight is a con game that's been going on for years.
The proponents of Hydrinos need to explain:
(1) Why have hydrinos never been observed in nature? We get to see a hell of lot of hydrogen in nature. We've seen it behave in a virtually uncountable number of environments. We've seen how it reacts, at temperatures ranging from a fraction of a degree above absolute zero, to hundreds of times hotter than the core of the sun. We've seen react with pretty much every element that exists on earth. High energy, low energy, you name it. We see how it behaves in stars, in nebula, in atmospheres ranging from mars to gas giants. And yet, there's never been the slightest hint, in any of those environments, that the hydrogen atom has an energy state below the common base. Why?
(2) Why has blacklight constantly claimed to be less than a year from commercializing their system?
(3) Why does blacklight pretend that they can't tell anyone how to reproduce their system from scratch, when they've filed a patent on it? (This one is particularly telling when it comes to the issue of fraud. Because either (a) they're lying when they say they can't reveal the process to build their device, or (b) they lied on their patent application. There's no third choice: a patent application is required to provide instructions detailed enough to reproduce an invention; either they've already given away the "secret" that they can't reveal, or they didn't. If they did, then they're lying; if they didn't, then they lied.)
The fact is, I would dearly love for something like Mills generator to work. If it did, it could solve so many problems in our world. All at once, we'd have a supply of virtually limitless clean energy, without pollution. God, can you imagine the things we could do if we got rid of all limits caused by the cost of producing energy?
The problem is, these things don't work. And the people who continue to pretend that they can, in spite of all of the evidence against it, never give up - because there's so damned much money to be made.
I got almost exactly the same lecture as this one, a few years back, when I predicted that Steorn's free energy rig was a fraud, and that there'd be some kind of technical failure in their much-ballyhooed demonstration. What happened? They set up their demo, of course it didn't work, and they came up with some bullshit about how the lights for the cameras overheated the bearings. And they appealed to new investors, promising that they'd fix the bearing problem and redo the demo.
Four years later? Still making the same promises. Just like Mills. Just like Tom Bearden. Just like every other free energy fraud.
Except it's not 4 years later. It's the same old schitt and still nothing properly tested by a credible agency or lab **TWENTY** plus years later. Note especially the point about the patents. That's what always trips up conmen and one of the many things that proved that Rossi was a fake.
-
WTF is Columbia Tech? Do they have a link or web page about their Mills related work?
Better than some web page, here is John DeCarlo himself talking about Columbia Tech and his firms involvement with BrLP. It's a serious company with excellent bona fides. Mills' only detractors are folks who haven't spent the time to investigate his claims carefully.External Content youtu.beContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy. -
'optiongeek',
"....... At some point (i.e. 4' 30") the reaction becomes self-sustaining and the input current is withdrawn. A minute or so later, the reaction has cooled enough that the ignition current is needed again...... "I am not understanding the logic or perhaps the wording. An event would not be self-sustaining if it cooled down in "a minute or so" and required more current to keep it going.
That would seem by definition not to be self sustaining?I am not commenting much on BLP or the process as I have not followed it closely or examined the provided data. However, I do question the self-sustain comment. Am I missing something?
-
However, I do question the self-sustain comment. Am I missing something?
What you are missing is described by my comment above about diffusion of charged species to ground (i.e. the vessel wall) after the current source is cut off. In every other terrestrial plasma, the diffusion is *extremely* quick, on the order of msec. Having a plasma stick around for minutes in the absence of a source current is a compelling demo. Ask any plasma physicist. -
Apparently the careful folks at EarthTech are "different" also. They carefully followed Mills' instructions and got... no excess power.
Grad mother MY is talking of a proposal Mill's made 20 years ago... No we fully understand MY's reasoning....
earthtech.org/experiments/blp/HiFi/Run5/Run5.html
I am not understanding the logic or perhaps the wording. An event would not be self-sustaining if it cooled down in "a minute or so" and required more current to keep it going.
Ask the ITER guys how long they can maintain a fusion plasma, how much energy (Money --> infinite..) they need. Thus one minute is a big breakthrough.
I agree that cool down is the wrong answer for restarting the ignition. I guess they detected the selfsustain mode by mere luck...(electronic problem.. charge overload ?)
One more point: The video is not a one-one shoot, it has been edited. -
(1) Why have hydrinos never been observed in nature? We get to see a hell of lot of hydrogen in nature. We've seen it behave in a virtually uncountable number of environments. We've seen how it reacts, at temperatures ranging from a fraction of a degree above absolute zero, to hundreds of times hotter than the core of the sun. We've seen react with pretty much every element that exists on earth. High energy, low energy, you name it. We see how it behaves in stars, in nebula, in atmospheres ranging from mars to gas giants. And yet, there's never been the slightest hint, in any of those environments, that the hydrogen atom has an energy state below the common base. Why?
We do see hydrinos in nature. Have you ever heard of 'dark matter'. It's actually quite common.(2) Why has blacklight constantly claimed to be less than a year from commercializing their system?
According to John DeCarlo in the video I linked, he's targeting a v1.0 field test unit in Jan/Feb. Very detailed project plan. Have a look.(3) Why does blacklight pretend that they can't tell anyone how to reproduce their system from scratch, when they've filed a patent on it? (This one is particularly telling when it comes to the issue of fraud. Because either (a) they're lying when they say they can't reveal the process to build their device, or (b) they lied on their patent application. There's no third choice: a patent application is required to provide instructions detailed enough to reproduce an invention; either they've already given away the "secret" that they can't reveal, or they didn't. If they did, then they're lying; if they didn't, then they lied.)
Uh, have you looked at BrLP's technical docs. He's actually pretty clear about how to build a device. In fact, I've spoken with an academic who did just that. Downloaded a BrLP experimental description and ran an experiment that got the same results. Never spoke to Mills until he was done. Gil Crouse is the name. Of course, there are about dozen other replicators who have succeeded. The information is all there, you just have to look.
