It's not in the sun that is interesting, it is what happens in the chromosphere and the corona - which are several orders of magnitude hotter than the surface.
This is the thought provoking point on the fact sheet.
BLP update
-
-
Quote
I also knew the molten silver thing was complete nonsense from the off.
Welcome to the club. Essentially all Mills' claims are unproven and improbable and have been going on in variations for >25 years. I am going to guess that Mills has made a good living off those claims though. I am not clear on how this is different from Rossi. Well, OK, maybe in degree.
-
.......and didn't AR copy RM's successful business model?
-
Wyttenbach - I have thought for a long time that Mills is in need of a good practical chemical engineer. I also knew the molten silver thing was complete nonsense from the off. That's one of the reasons I am a Safire fan- Monty Childs recruited good engineers from the start.
Afternoon, you said you know Dr Dofours? Does he still work and maybe put out papers, has he been hired by anyone important? Interested in follow ups on the papers in the other thread. And any relation or possible potenciation of any other electromagnetic pico-chemical power release reaction, related theories like Hydrinos/H2* and larger H* cluster. Those two (metal/H deep bond formation + H2* formation) working in tandem could drop the input to output limitations of H2* formation if the the variables are favorable? Ending in a better COP.
Appologies for my ignorance and for continuing to bring this up, but it really has struck a nerve. If anything is fundamentally preventing this from working, through a many models properly, I will let it rest. I know it caused major engineering problems, but can someone also help me understand why you think silver wouldn't work in a MHD system?
-
I know it caused major engineering problems, but can someone also help me understand why you think silver wouldn't work in a MHD system?
Silver vapor will immediately blind any PVC or window to PWC it's that simple.
Iron Hydrogen fusion is military field long before LENR was here... I'm wondering they let Hagelstein run his cobalt version.
Welcome to the club. Essentially all Mills' claims are unproven and improbable and have been going on in variations for >25 years.
The (low..) COP of the SUN-Cell is proven. His stateful Hydrino model is now refuted, but the Hydrino resonances are a fact. I hope you understand these subtle difference as they are not basic medicine knowledge.
-
https://e-catworld.com/2020/01…iant-light-power-testing/
So anyone who had doubts on if Dr. Randy Booker actually wrote it.
Silver vapor will immediately blind any PVC or window to PWC it's that simple.
Iron Hydrogen fusion is military field long before LENR was here... I'm wondering they let Hagelstein run his cobalt version.
The (low..) COP of the SUN-Cell is proven. His stateful Hydrino model is now refuted, but the Hydrino resonances are a fact. I hope you understand these subtle difference as they are not basic medicine knowledge.
I was refering to the magnetohydrodynamic generator approach with molten silver. Let's entertain the interpretation that most exothermic interactions between choice metals and H at low energies aren't fusion, but a miraculous pico-chemical process. Through your and Mills' theories (which I personally like) are stable deep orbit bonds between some metals and hydrogen possible? Dr Jacques Dofours claimed it is possible through the standard model.
-
Lets wait for the new results from the solar mission. Then we might know how the sun produces its energy (LENR in corona??) . The classic model seems to be to simplistic and thus nonsensical... The key question is how deuterium is produced.
Curiously, there was evidence of deuterium production from hydrogen in the reaction of deuterium contaminated by atmospheric gas caused by a electric arc from carbon electrodes. On that basis I substituted in the state equation 2 hydrogens for deuterium and then used that state equation to solve the mass balance of the reaction of a carbon arc in water. The result showed de novo production of nitrogen, hence, the assumption of hydrogen to hydrogen fusion supported. Perhaps hydrogen to hydrogen fusion occurs or perhaps a chain of activated (magnetronite hydrogen) is involved. The laser on catalyst experiments seem to support production of a chain of hydrogen.
-
It's not in the sun that is interesting, it is what happens in the chromosphere and the corona - which are several orders of magnitude hotter than the surface.
Yes, I have mentioned this before. Kinetic modeling of the conversion of fuel (unknown fuel product from weak-interacting state based fusion) to heat indicated the heat output increases with temperature. The nano sized clusters predicted by this kind of fusion could be a match for nano flares in the sun. Hence, in this model it is conversion of fuel from fusion that causes the temperature distribution of the chromosphere.
-
-
Quote
BLP has announced successfully running their reaction for long durations, even extending for hours. The tests you report are short duration, under 5 seconds. The methodology for calorimetry of such relatively short reactions strikes me as rather delicate.
The total actual power on test time covered by the report was three five second intervals over five hours and that the COP of 4.1 was cherry picked from the best 2.1 seconds of those 15 seconds when the actual best measured COP over a five second interval was only 2.5. If the best 15 seconds of five hours was cherry picked for 2.1 seconds which looked good, the remaining 5 hours could well have had a normal sub 1.0 COP, and zero over-unity could be the truth.
One could cherry pick the output of a AAA Battery when it discharges ignoring the charge up required, and claim a higher COP using the same methodology. When the words and numbers are not to be trusted, is the man? Such a handling of crucial information should come as a warning for potential investors - proprietary information or not.
-
-
Amazing news and they better keep these external validations coming! With still no dangerous particles or signs of significant nuclear activity. LENR researchers, reporters and theoreticians can't keep making fun of or conveniently explaining away alternative mechanisms. A safe MW/liter energy source is needed regardless as a main production source. Would be interesting to see the run times at this output and the COP.
-
Internal test - employee from 1999.
-
Can't see why BLP aren't doing any longer-term tests lasting more than the several seconds reported here. Makes it look like the 'hydrino' effect only lasts for a few seconds then fizzles out - not convincing data by any stretch of the imagination! RM seems very able theoretically but why can't he design sensible experiments, and the analysis of heat losses treating these complex reactors as calorimeters is patently ridiculous. The number one rule in calorimetry is that the heat measurement has to be independent of the heat source? This is all a terrible mess - but then why should we care since he claims its not LENR anyway. Maybe these two weird nonsensical evaluation reports by Nansteel and Booker were driven by desperation following their patent rejection.
-
Makes it look like the 'hydrino' effect only lasts for a few seconds then fizzles out -
It is a short effect. I see it in the experiments I have conducted. I believe the essential particles and fields are the same as for BLP. One doesn't combine the same particles and same fields to get different results. Physics has never worked that way. The BLP process is a form of colder fusion driven by relativity where the effects of relativity are created by weak interacting quantum states. The quick loss of heat is because the energy is converted to a fuel. Most likely a particle like X-17.
-
For those who would like to know more about x-17...
New evidence supporting the existence of the hypothetic X17 particle
A.J. Krasznahorkay, M. Csatlos, L. Csige, J. Gulyas, M. Koszta, B. Szihalmi, J. Timar, D.S. Firak, A. Nagy, N.J. Sas, A. Krasznahorkay
(Submitted on 23 Oct 2019)
We observed electron-positron pairs from the electro-magnetically forbidden M0 transition depopulating the 21.01 MeV 0− state in 4He. A peak was observed in their e+e− angular correlations at 115∘ with 7.2σ significance, and could be described by assuming the creation and subsequent decay of a light particle with mass of mXc2=16.84±0.16(stat)±0.20(syst) MeV and ΓX= 3.9×10−5 eV. According to the mass, it is likely the same X17 particle, which we recently suggested [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 052501 (2016)] for describing the anomaly observed in 8Be.
-
Drgenek - what experiments have you conducted to show this? If its true then it would prove that such an energy source would be impossible to harness as BLP have found to their cost over the last 30 yrs or so - without reaching some equilibrium in energy release on high current stimulation the reactors just explode, as they have clearly demonstrated. Any suggestions for a way out of this? Trying to be positive!
-
You would need positrons to generate X17 particles, so where would these positrons come from in BLP's reactor? Possibly from positive Kaon-Pion-Muon decay to positrons as described in Holmlid's setup? A wide range of possible particles result from intense electrical discharges, including neutrons etc, as observed from thunderstorms/ball lightning effects - so which reactions underly BLP's electrical discharge mediated claims of excess energy remain open I think?
-
Drgenek - what experiments have you conducted to show this? If its true then it would prove that such an energy source would be impossible to harness as BLP have found to their cost over the last 30 yrs or so - without reaching some equilibrium in energy release on high current stimulation the reactors just explode, as they have clearly demonstrated. Any suggestions for a way out of this? Trying to be positive!
Explosions and pressure waves in an experiment are good if engineered well. Could design direct mechanical energy extraction, like a closed cycle combustion engine analog, piston or jet turbine based. Rockets and explosives as well! Imagine something like a reusable Starship from SpaceX running off of dense hydrogen heated methane!
Another link: https://brilliantlightpower.com/hydrino-in-a-bottle/
Another validation: https://brilliantlightpower.co…Brilliant-Light-Power.pdf
Business summary: https://brilliantlightpower.com/business-summary-updated/
-
Can't see why BLP aren't doing any longer-term tests lasting more than the several seconds reported here. Makes it look like the 'hydrino' effect only lasts for a few seconds then fizzles out - not convincing data by any stretch of the imagination! RM seems very able theoretically but why can't he design sensible experiments, and the analysis of heat losses treating these complex reactors as calorimeters is patently ridiculous. The number one rule in calorimetry is that the heat measurement has to be independent of the heat source? This is all a terrible mess - but then why should we care since he claims its not LENR anyway. Maybe these two weird nonsensical evaluation reports by Nansteel and Booker were driven by desperation following their patent rejection.
I would hope that we should care about amazing new energy sources that accomplish similar ends to LENR. If not we would become just as foolish as those who think hot fusion, hunter gathering or solar panels are the only way. The new fire is probably more like actual fire than many of us are willing to admit! The sun is fusion powered but it's surface or corona is 'on fire' pico-chemically with hydrino/H2* formation.
