• Quote

    What is the point of proving of what and has been proven many times already. Every design is a departure from the previous one. I am concerned. Randy was and still is my favorite of all, but my faith is weakening.

    Conclusions about scientific matters and technology claims should never be about "belief" and "faith." Rather and obviously, it should be about facts, evidence, and good reasoning. Mills has never produced any device which did not require a huge amount of power to make some sparks or glow. Big deal. Mills promised power stations with his discovery, two decades ago. Why in the world would anyone believe Mills today? BTW, did you see the fat cables at the bottom of the current silly gas making kludge? I don't suppose they're structural support, do you?

  • I stopped being interested on BLP at the third cycle of reinvention, several years ago. Mills is much more worried of keeping the money flowing than of launching a product to market. Perhaps he is right, but he has zilch proof.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • You saw mechanical movement in most videos in the last year. When the process starts some valves switch and pressure rises in the connecting hoses. That causes some movement and shaking if the camera is mounted somewhere with a mechanical connection to these hoses. Your point is ridiculous: they showed videos of melting reactors and molybdenium rods with arm wide holes in it and you think they want to impress us with a shaky camery?? Sorry, but there are so many valid objections against BLP - I think you can make better than that.


    Yeah, maybe. But Do I need ? Look, I was riding through Vietnam, on a scooter, with my silly Z5 Compact mounted on a small adapter, mounted to the right mirror. It had a quite flexible arm to adjust it in 3 axis.

    So I expected to have a lot of clips, which, while driving, were shaken and blurred to the maximum .... but NOTHING.


    Sonys shake-minimizer is so well built, it erased shaking of the airflow against the device, shaking from unpaved roads, and so on.


    So. Here it is NOT. Cannot believe, they have a LAB but use crap as their main visual evidence-tool.

    This, dude, is ridiculous.

  • Many say Team Google provided an "umbrella effect" with their Nature paper, providing cover so that LENR can be studied, and discussed in the mainstream without repercussions. I wonder if this proof?


    https://www.reddit.com/r/Brill…orsinchief_regarding_the/

    I think the hydrino paper came out before, tho. It was discussed here in one of the threads, I recall having skimmed through it.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • Yes, the paper came out before Team Google's Nature article, but the "Editors in Chief" ( sounds better than Moderator :) ), say it is okay to discuss it now, as in today. Would they have said this without the Google umbrella effect?

    That would be within the interested scientific/technical community, but from the PR side, the Nature paper mostly killed any potential new interest in the matter from the general public at large.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • That would be within the interested scientific/technical community, but from the PR side, the Nature paper mostly killed any potential new interest in the matter from the general public at large.


    Agree about the "general public", but at this point we do not need them. Only time they were interested was the first 40 days following the FP's announcement. Since then the LENR flock have wandered in the desert looking for the promised land, and it still is, so nothing changes there.


    But the field needs the mainstream science to take notice, and for those who read the Nature paper carefully, they will. Google reported 2 noteworthy successes that make further investigation acceptable, and those in mainstream reading the fine print, will conclude that is only the tip of the iceberg.

  • Of course, but you know that for continued support, specially when results are meager, PR is fundamental for keeping syphoning the bucks to the research programs. I don't deny that the Nature paper is important, but it has some strong Phyrric aftertaste I can't pass yet.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.